Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's New Map

justinobeirne.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 377 posts

Re: Apple's New Map

#111

Post by freeflight »

lvs wrote: post #92
mastazi wrote: post #11

Another great article from this blog! Last year's article from the same author [1] about Goggle Maps' use of photogrammetry and other building scanning techiques was, in my opinion, one of the most interesting HN submissions ever (its comment section[2] is also worth a read). [1] https://www.justinobeirne.com/google-maps-moat [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15965653

Just to be clear, as far as I can tell from Google, the author actually works for Apple [1] on Apple Maps, at least at some point. So this blog may serve as an advertisement of his own work, despite the fact that it seems to be written in the voice of an observer. "Justin O'Beirne designed and led the development of Apple’s cartography effort, and is the author of Maps for the Masses, an upcoming book about digital c…

"led the development" pretty much implies he's not working there anymore.

Reading the article it's also pretty clear he doesn't have any insider-insights, particularly with the speculation about building shapes and how Apple supposedly outsourced that, as a manual task, to a couple of thousand Indians.

I doubt an Apple insider would be too keen on speculations like that because if it turns out to be true it would be kind of bonkers.

Re: Apple's New Map

#112

Post by freeflight »

IvyMike wrote: post #15

I wonder if Apple is artificially shortening buildings so you can see what is behind them.

I thought about that too, but in these same examples, other buildings were made taller, making it more difficult to see what's behind them, so that can't be it.

Re: Apple's New Map

#113

Post by pwg »

matt4077 wrote: post #84
mulmen wrote: post #60

This is really neat but I don't really care about greenery when I'm using Apple Maps. Can they take a break from figuring out how to convert satellite images into green blobs and devise an algorithm to put street names on the screen ? Apple and Google maps are both worthless as maps without typing in an actual address and using navigation because they can't just show the main cross street names on the screen. It abso…

After taking a look at SF, it seems to me that there really isn't enough space for additional street names without losing something else. So I believe your complaint is more about the prioritisation among streets, or of streets vs. other entities? The first would seem valid, if Mission St is, as I gather, rather important. FWIW: after searching for Mission District, the street is now visible far more often. It's labe…

> The decision of de-emphasising street names for the benefit of landmarks/museums/event locations etc. is rather subjective: I often use Maps for purposes other than directions, such as getting a feel for an apartment's neighbourhood, finding restaurants, exploring places in the news, or that appeared in books or movies, or even just "sightseeing

This would seem to call for a small set of 'detail view' modes in the UI. I.e., a 'navigation' mode that priortizes street names over other details. And a 'remote sightseeing' mode that emphasies POI's over street names, etc.

Re: Apple's New Map

#114

Post by zawerf »

I remember seeing a demo of pix2pix where this was one of targeted use cases. [1]

There were even demos of the reverse, where you take a street map and convert it back into a plausible photorealistic satellite image. [2]

[1] https://phillipi.github.io/pix2pix/ specifically https://phillipi.github.io/pix2pix/images/sat2map1_AtoB/late...

[2] https://phillipi.github.io/pix2pix/images/map2sat1_BtoA/late...

Re: Apple's New Map

#115

Post by thrower123 »

MaysonL wrote: post #96
crazygringo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's obviously an intentional choice to avoid too much screen clutter... but I agree it's infuriating. I've spoken in the past with some people who work on Maps products and have heard "people say they want it but then they really don't..." and I honestly can't imagine what UX studies are telling them that. All the time I see a destination and I'm trying to figure out what closest cross street I should stop at and by…

And heck, it would be very easy to make this a setting: yes or no, this user wants as many street names as possible.

Member when software had lots of options how to configure it to show you the information you wanted? Peppridge Farms remembers.

Also VLC and a few other weird fringe holdouts...

Re: Apple's New Map

#116

Post by fouc »

crazygringo wrote: post #73
mulmen wrote: post #60

This is really neat but I don't really care about greenery when I'm using Apple Maps. Can they take a break from figuring out how to convert satellite images into green blobs and devise an algorithm to put street names on the screen ? Apple and Google maps are both worthless as maps without typing in an actual address and using navigation because they can't just show the main cross street names on the screen. It abso…

It's obviously an intentional choice to avoid too much screen clutter... but I agree it's infuriating. I've spoken in the past with some people who work on Maps products and have heard "people say they want it but then they really don't..." and I honestly can't imagine what UX studies are telling them that. All the time I see a destination and I'm trying to figure out what closest cross street I should stop at and by…

>Whenever you zoom in enough that there's enough room on a visible street to put a label, then put the label! I mean if I zoom in so far that only the one street is visible and there's no other text on it, but Maps still leaves it blank... it just feels inexcusable.

Agreed. Happens on google maps too, and that's just so irritating

Re: Apple's New Map

#117

Post by chipotle_coyote »

imgabe wrote: post #47

You know what I really never use the map on my phone for? Figuring out how many trees there are. Do the directions work?

In the area Apple's new maps are in, in my experience (important to underline that): yes, they do. I've been using these new maps since they appeared in the iOS 12 beta, so close to half a year, and they're pretty good. And, yes, to a comment you made below this one, Apple Maps is getting good at handling traffic. I find them equal to Google, although not as good as Waze. (Yes, I know Google owns Waze, but I'm standing by this. Waze does better than Google Maps here.)

As the linked blog post shows, they're definitely not perfect; I haven't encountered anything particularly egregious, but the fun thing about maps is that virtually everyone will run into what are ostensibly "edge cases" eventually. Apple Maps has steered me wrong before, but so has Google and Waze. (Waze has gotten much better at destinations in the last few years, after their purchase by Google, although they still have a disquieting penchant for "shortcut" directions that include "make this uncontrolled left turn across three lanes of traffic." Not only does Apple rarely do that, Google rarely does that.)

Re: Apple's New Map

#118

Post by fouc »

ryandrake wrote: post #81
crazygringo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's obviously an intentional choice to avoid too much screen clutter... but I agree it's infuriating. I've spoken in the past with some people who work on Maps products and have heard "people say they want it but then they really don't..." and I honestly can't imagine what UX studies are telling them that. All the time I see a destination and I'm trying to figure out what closest cross street I should stop at and by…

I’ve worked on mapping software, and in fact on street name placement (Not Google or Apple). The code we had for deciding where and when to draw street names has to be among the most complicated, full-of-edge-cases code I have ever encountered. Engineering is pulling one direction, data providers are pulling another direction. UX is pulling this direction, cartography is pulling that direction. Everybody in the compa…

Seems like this is the type of thing that should be ultimately built out as an algorithm rather than hardcoded exceptions etc.

Re: Apple's New Map

#119

Post by cameldrv »

bdamm wrote: post #80
mulmen wrote: post #60

This is really neat but I don't really care about greenery when I'm using Apple Maps. Can they take a break from figuring out how to convert satellite images into green blobs and devise an algorithm to put street names on the screen ? Apple and Google maps are both worthless as maps without typing in an actual address and using navigation because they can't just show the main cross street names on the screen. It abso…

Agreed; and, the greenery information is useless without also a way to determine ownership or transit privileges. Is it private, public (district, state, federal), military, or some other kind of ownership class? I find it hard to believe that so much work could go into maps when actually using it doesn't seem to be the main goal. How am I going to use this greenery information?

This would be killer. There are some kml overlays for BLM and NFS land, but imagine an "access" layer that was something like "public free access", public access with admission fee, private but open to the public (like retail), and private.

Re: Apple's New Map

#120

Post by nlh »

crazygringo wrote: post #73
mulmen wrote: post #60

This is really neat but I don't really care about greenery when I'm using Apple Maps. Can they take a break from figuring out how to convert satellite images into green blobs and devise an algorithm to put street names on the screen ? Apple and Google maps are both worthless as maps without typing in an actual address and using navigation because they can't just show the main cross street names on the screen. It abso…

It's obviously an intentional choice to avoid too much screen clutter... but I agree it's infuriating. I've spoken in the past with some people who work on Maps products and have heard "people say they want it but then they really don't..." and I honestly can't imagine what UX studies are telling them that. All the time I see a destination and I'm trying to figure out what closest cross street I should stop at and by…

I wonder if this varies based on location / version? I just tried Maps on iOS 12.0.1 and it appears to do exactly this, at least in San Francisco. Every time I zoom in on a street, the label fades in right at the center, like you suggest.
Post reply on HN