New Google Maps for iOS

C

CEpeep

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
6,061
The new Google Maps is out for iPhone. It has turn-by-turn, pseudo-3D and all that good stuff. Also has public transit routing (Apple's biggest oversight in iOS 6 Maps, IMO).

Has anyone tried it yet? An iPad version is coming soon so I have to wait to check it out, but I'm curious how it stacks up to iOS 5 Maps.
 
It's better than iOS maps in every possible way, every major news site has a review about this. The only possible issue is it can't be set as default which is of course Apple's fault.
 
It doesn't appear to show traffic incidents, which are enormously advantageous in any major metropolitan area. It also uses raster tiles versus iOS maps' vector assets, and you can't pull addresses out of the contacts list like you can in Apple maps.

Doesn't seem to be a clear-cut winner from where I'm sitting.
 
Almost updated my phone to iOS6 when it was released last night, then realized there isn't a way to integrate it into iOS like it was when it was the native maps app. I'll stay at iOS5 until I get my next phone.
 
MrCrispy said:
It's better than iOS maps in every possible way, every major news site has a review about this.
Click to expand...

Disagreed. Google's mapping data is superior, but the app itself is inferior, IMO. Apple Maps has better features, though Google did add some features that they refused to grant Apple access to during negotiations. I'm not a big fan of Google's attempts to tie your location to your Google account, though. Google's insistence on tracking and compiling everything you do and selling it to advertisers is beyond creepy.

Gruber had a good point when he said that mapping on iOS has gotten better since iOS 6's release. He's right; you can now choose from Apple Maps, Google Maps, Nokia Maps, Mapquest, Bing Maps, even AT&T has a mapping app now. Win/win for users.
 
Terpfen said:
Apple Maps has better features, though
Click to expand...

Such as?

Google did add some features that they refused to grant Apple access to during negotiations.
Click to expand...

Oh, you were present during those negotiations?

Because all the reports have said Google *wanted* to add stuff to Maps but Apple refused to let Google have any branding, much less any control (remember the old Maps app was not Google's, it was Apple's. Google was merely a data provider, they couldn't do anything). The mere fact that Google has shipped such a solid maps app on iOS so quickly shows they are more than willing to bring great products to a competitors platform.

Google's insistence on tracking and compiling everything you do and selling it to advertisers is beyond creepy.
Click to expand...

Google has never, ever sold your data to advertisers.
 
kllrnohj said:
Google has never, ever sold your data to advertisers.
Click to expand...
Considering that Google is an advertising company, and given the vagueries of internal corporate accounting, it's entirely possible that, in a legal sense, Google has sold data to advertisers.
 
kllrnohj said:
Such as?
Click to expand...

Siri integration, and therefore better turn-by-turn direction implementation; more useful traffic alerts (at least to me); quicker loading, which is something I never thought I would say about a Google competitor; offline caching; I can keep going here.

Oh, you were present during those negotiations?

Because all the reports have said Google *wanted* to add stuff to Maps but Apple refused to let Google have any branding, much less any control (remember the old Maps app was not Google's, it was Apple's. Google was merely a data provider, they couldn't do anything). The mere fact that Google has shipped such a solid maps app on iOS so quickly shows they are more than willing to bring great products to a competitors platform.
Click to expand...

The bolded is nothing more than you playing the result. Yes, Google shipped a solid maps app; they did so after being evicted as the source of mapping data. They had no choice if they wanted the massive iOS market to continue to use their services.

As for the negotiations, we already know why Google was given the boot. Since Google provided the mapping data, they could dictate what kind of mapping data was given and how it was used. They held back on the data needed to implement new features in the app, specifically data for turn by turn directions. Google basically wanted to turn Apple's app into a Google app developed by Apple. That wasn't going to happen.

Again, Gruber is correct when he states that the iOS mapping scene is now better than it was in iOS 5.

Google has never, ever sold your data to advertisers.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of Google's revenue comes from advertising. They are literally an advertising company. Yes, they are compiling and retaining personal data for purposes of advertising.
 
Google 1 -- Apple 0

My opinion of the matter is -- you could have the most hipster, whiz bang, awesome #1 map application in existence but if your data is crap none of that means anything.

Getting your data right is the first step. What is more useful to the common idiot off the street? A map app that might not be as flashy, but always shows you the correct data, and gets you there fast and accurate? Or an app that looks great on the surface but leaves you stuck out in the boonies with crackheads swarming your car?

"It Just works" is becoming more and more funny to hear these days from mac people.
 
MrCrispy said:
It's better than iOS maps in every possible way, every major news site has a review about this. The only possible issue is it can't be set as default which is of course Apple's fault.
Click to expand...

Not in my experience. I still prefer iOS maps actually.

iOS maps is much smoother on my iPhone 5 than the new Google Maps app. iOS Maps is running at a solid 60fps and Google Maps feels somewhere around 30-40 or so. iOS maps also has proper vector rendering where Google Maps still does crap like this: http://i.imgur.com/0HGLV.jpg

iOS maps can access my contact's address's which is useful to me, and has full OS/Siri integration which is IMO the most important feature. When I'm in my car I just want to ask Siri, take me to "whatever POI name". Or take me to "address" and have it just look it up and go.

I haven't had any problems with iOS maps data, so that's equal to me. I've been using iOS maps a few times a week for over 2 months now and have not come across mapping problems, so IMO the problem with their data is way, way overblown or just limited to some areas, it's certainly not universal. The only way Google Maps is better is it has public transit information, but I don't use public transit.

The biggest missing feature from iOS maps IMO is no street view, but the Google Maps app doesn't have it either.
 
Last edited:
collegeboy69us said:
Getting your data right is the first step.
Click to expand...

If that's true, then Google should go back to the drawing board.

There is no such thing as getting data correct on your first go. That's an impossible standard. You can keep improving your data, as Google has done over the course of a decade, but 100% accuracy is never going to happen.

I realize your only posts here are to complain about or bash Apple for perceived shortcomings, but don't be ridiculous in the process.
 
XenIneX said:
Considering that Google is an advertising company, and given the vagueries of internal corporate accounting, it's entirely possible that, in a legal sense, Google has sold data to advertisers.
Click to expand...

Google's privacy policy does not allow them to sell data to advertisers, so if you can find proof of that you're in for an awesome class action lawsuit.

More importantly, Google's entire business model is about them *NOT* selling data to anyone. Google's role is to be the middle man, after all.

Terpfen said:
Siri integration, and therefore better turn-by-turn direction implementation;
Click to expand...

Uh, no? Siri integration would be nice to launch directions from voice, but once you've actually started turn-by-turn directions Siri doesn't bring anything to the table, especially since Google's text-to-speech engine is slightly better sounding than Siri.

more useful traffic alerts (at least to me); quicker loading, which is something I never thought I would say about a Google competitor; offline caching; I can keep going here.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, the question will be can Google add those features faster than Apple can improve their data. My guess is "yes" but time will tell.

As for the negotiations, we already know why Google was given the boot. Since Google provided the mapping data, they could dictate what kind of mapping data was given and how it was used. They held back on the data needed to implement new features in the app, specifically data for turn by turn directions. Google basically wanted to turn Apple's app into a Google app developed by Apple. That wasn't going to happen.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that source doesn't agree with your initial claim that Google added features they refused to grant Apple. That article says Google wanted to add features, but Apple didn't want to agree to the terms of more branding or adding Latitude.

The vast majority of Google's revenue comes from advertising. They are literally an advertising company. Yes, they are compiling and retaining personal data for purposes of advertising.
Click to expand...

Yup, that's true - but that also isn't disagreeing with what I said. :)

wonderfield said:
No.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you don't just get to say "no" to facts. Google Maps on Android has been vector based for years, and Google Maps on iOS is also using vectors. Apple didn't invent that one.
 
CEpeep said:
The new Google Maps is out for iPhone. It has turn-by-turn, pseudo-3D and all that good stuff. Also has public transit routing (Apple's biggest oversight in iOS 6 Maps, IMO).

Has anyone tried it yet? An iPad version is coming soon so I have to wait to check it out, but I'm curious how it stacks up to iOS 5 Maps.
Click to expand...

I've tried it and I love it. Much better than it used to be. Also, my old iPhone 4 now has the GPS features that supposedly only the 4S could do. I applaud Google for shoving this up Apple's arse. :D
 
Yes, Apple maps work well for some people, esp those in big cities, and it does have nice features like Siri integration (which btw I'm sure other apps could add if only Apple opened up the API, which they won't do), contacts integration etc. But the thing is if you can't trust the mapping data, the app is useless. And I've seen plenty of reports of that being the case even in big cities.

And I would trust Google 10x than Apple (or pretty much any other company) based on their track record and openness. Post-Jobs Apple is slightly more transparent, and I don't want to support a company that holds back features from its customers to force them to upgrade.

The fact that Google Maps became the #1 app in hours shows many others agree. The best thing about Apple Maps was it forced Google to make its own version, which in turn will only force Apple to improve faster, and it gives users more choice. Same applies to the mail and youtube apps, iOS users actually have the best Google smartphone experience now :)
 
I think that's the gist of what Terpfen is saying when he says that the mapping situation in iOS 6 was actually made better by the Apple Maps blunder. I don't believe Google Maps would have even been available as an option if it weren't for the backlash on Apple's data quality, which wouldn't have been a good deal for anyone.

I don't think we have the best Google experience, though. Android still has a better mail client.
 
The new Google apps on iOS have a better design than the ones on Android. My guess is its an entirely different team who built it from scratch for iOS, and the changes will trickle down to Android over time.
 
kllrnohj said:
Uh, no? Siri integration would be nice to launch directions from voice, but once you've actually started turn-by-turn directions Siri doesn't bring anything to the table, especially since Google's text-to-speech engine is slightly better sounding than Siri.
Click to expand...

The bolded part is all you needed to say, because it's the only part of your sentence that actually responds to what I said.

Fair enough, the question will be can Google add those features faster than Apple can improve their data. My guess is "yes" but time will tell.
Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely they will be able to improve the Google Maps app faster than Apple can fix their data. That goes without saying. The question is whether or not Google Maps will ever be better or even on par as an application, and whether its features will be compelling enough to overcome Google's desire to sell ads based on my location.

Yes, and that source doesn't agree with your initial claim that Google added features they refused to grant Apple. That article says Google wanted to add features, but Apple didn't want to agree to the terms of more branding or adding Latitude.
Click to expand...

The source absolutely agrees with my claim, because my claim is a restatement of the source. Google wanted more control and more access to Maps users in exchange for features. Apple said no. It was a reenactment of Apple's negotiations with the publishing industry, which also wanted customer subscription data in exchange for offering their products on the iPad. Apple said no to them, and they said no to Google.

Yup, that's true - but that also isn't disagreeing with what I said. :)
Click to expand...

It does, you simply are choosing to ignore it. The fact that Google's revenue comes from advertising means that, yes, they have sold your data to advertisers. That's also why they wanted more information on users of the old Maps application in exchange for features; they wanted to sell that data to make money. That's what Google does. They offer services for free because they make money selling information about you and how you use their services.

When something is free, you are the product being sold.

wonderfield said:
I think that's the gist of what Terpfen is saying when he says that the mapping situation in iOS 6 was actually made better by the Apple Maps blunder. I don't believe Google Maps would have even been available as an option if it weren't for the backlash on Apple's data quality, which wouldn't have been a good deal for anyone.
Click to expand...

More or less, yes, that's what I'm saying. Apple has opened the doors to third party map applications that simply didn't exist before iOS 6 and Apple Maps were released. This is a gain for everyone.
 
Terpfen said:
The bolded part is all you needed to say, because it's the only part of your sentence that actually responds to what I said.
Click to expand...

Well for that one you'll need to wait for Apple to support setting default apps - probably going to happen right about never ;)

It does, you simply are choosing to ignore it. The fact that Google's revenue comes from advertising means that, yes, they have sold your data to advertisers. That's also why they wanted more information on users of the old Maps application in exchange for features; they wanted to sell that data to make money. That's what Google does. They offer services for free because they make money selling information about you and how you use their services.
Click to expand...

Nope. Google does does not and has not ever sold your data to advertisers. You are failing to grasp the fundamentals of Google's business.

When something is free, you are the product being sold.
Click to expand...

Oft repeated tripe that servers only to proclaim the ignorance of the one making the statement.
 
kllrnohj said:
Well for that one you'll need to wait for Apple to support setting default apps - probably going to happen right about never ;)
Click to expand...

While true, this has nothing to do with my original statement.

Nope. Google does does not and has not ever sold your data to advertisers. You are failing to grasp the fundamentals of Google's business.
Click to expand...

I grasp Google's fundamental business just fine. Perhaps you should look at their financial statements in order to live up to your own standards. Over 90% of Google's revenue comes from advertising. This is why they tried to get away with things like using real names on Google+; their entire business is centered on constructing as detailed a profile and history on individual users as possible for the purposes of selling that data for advertising.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with this, it is true, and honestly it's getting pretty boring repeating it.

Oft repeated tripe that servers only to proclaim the ignorance of the one making the statement.
Click to expand...

Ah. You are now descending into ad hominem. Thank you for conceding the discussion. Enjoy your day.
 
Terpfen said:
I grasp Google's fundamental business just fine. Perhaps you should look at their financial statements in order to live up to your own standards. Over 90% of Google's revenue comes from advertising. This is why they tried to get away with things like using real names on Google+; their entire business is centered on constructing as detailed a profile and history on individual users as possible for the purposes of selling that data for advertising.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with this, it is true, and honestly it's getting pretty boring repeating it.
Click to expand...

What's true is that most of Google's money comes from ads. What's not true is that they sell your information to advertisers. You are making a leap directly from one to the other with zero supporting evidence as if they are clearly linked - they are not. You can repeat is much as you want, it's not true and in all likelihood will never be true. It would completely undermine their own business if they did that. Not to mention it would violate their privacy policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top