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

151–160 of 377 posts

Re: Apple's New Map

#151

Post by astrange »

kalleboo wrote: post #134
xvector wrote: post #21

I think this article illustrates a critical issue with Apple's software. The stance on privacy means little machine learning can take place. Little machine learning means that Apple has to resort to more manual techniques. This, in turn, leads to the far inferior (and often dangerously incorrect) place databases and issues with their Maps application. And then users will simply turn to an alternative which absolutely…

How can violating someone's privacy improve their place database? Extract "I'm waiting at now" from people's iMessage chats??? Google has been connecting place names by OCRing storefronts taken with their street view cars. Apple claim to be doing the same thing (but apparently doing a far worse job of it)

If you look up somewhere in Google Maps and then go there, with your phone in your pocket, Google knows where you went. It also knows how long you stayed there.

Now they know exactly where it is, when people like to go there, and if the opening hours seem accurate.

Not limited to them of course, this is also check-in companies' business model, like Foursquare.

Re: Apple's New Map

#152

Post by musgrove »

It's hard to get excited about a work that's still so much in progress. Who will be the target market and in what capacity for the final product? Or is that not to be worried about? This seems like doing something because you can, rather than a large demand for anything about it.

Re: Apple's New Map

#153

Post by jameshatheway »

I used to live in the Cayman Islands (Grand Cayman specifically), and my issue with Apple Maps is, forget about the enhanced details being mentioned in this article, the actual landmass on the map is WRONG, and I just checked - its still wrong. Roads and roundabouts and my condo, and Camana Bay (big mixed commercial living area) apparently in the ocean. Its been like this since they introduced it.

Here's a side by side of West Bay, Seven Mile Beach and Boddentown, between Apple Maps on the left and Google Maps on the right.

I understand that its not a huge market (even though there's something like 2 million+ cruise shippers stopping every year), but man... it really makes me not trust it anywhere when the map is completely wrong, geographically speaking

https://i.imgur.com/4DaiXyp.png https://i.imgur.com/f5nerNY.png

Re: Apple's New Map

#154

Post by logicallee »

jjeaff wrote: post #150
logicallee wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Yes, totally serious.) For me, it's not hard to read. I'd prefer it, anyway. Still, if you wouldn't prefer it then we can see what the Google engineer meant, as this is exactly what you get if you show as much information as possible!

I'm confused, are you only talking about apple maps? I just checked on Google maps and I can easily see all the street names on my screen, as long as I zoom in far enough that there is enough space.

I was specifically exploring this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18359646

I wanted to see how it would look if "whenever you zoom in enough that there's enough room on a visible street to put a label, then put the label!"

I think my render looks absolutely fine. I don't see why I wouldn't always use it if I had a toggle switch. Yes it's cluttered if you just glance at it, but we don't use maps as pieces of minimalist art.

Re: Apple's New Map

#155

Post by ccostes »

I wonder how many people missed the interesting conclusion of that article (that places, not map details, are the key when we get to augmented reality and self-driving) since it spent so much time analyzing the differences in the new map and speculating on how they did it. That stuff was cool too, but I think the author had a really good insight that most people are going to miss.

Re: Apple's New Map

#156

Post by repsilat »

bo1024 wrote: post #106
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…

Maps and directions should be separate programs, they fulfill different needs. In a more open-access world, you could build them both on top of the same data (I assume you can with open street map).

Most of the time when I'm going to an unfamiliar restaurant in my city I don't want "directions" though -- I want to know "It's on street X between Avenue B and C."

If I have to walk up 10 blocks and across 5 blocks, my route is going to depend on the traffic lights. "Directions" aren't what I want, what I want is to know where the thing is in terms of landmarks I know and can recognise, and that mostly means street names.

Re: Apple's New Map

#157

Post by s0rce »

nazca wrote: post #133

I think the author missed that the old version, and Google Maps currently, typically use green to denote certain types of public land (parks, national forest, etc.) not vegetation per se. Apple is solving a different use case by color coding by vegetation. And It's one that I think is less useful. KNowing that there is vegetation on someone else's private land isn't really that useful to me. But knowing the boundarie…

For some reason the national forest boundaries on google map seem to be frequently wrong and also change over time (at least I've noticed some changes). Trinity (CA) looks to be completely missing, as is a large portion of Gifford Pinchot or Okanogan-Wenatchee and maybe Snoqualmie (WA). Not sure why this happens.

Re: Apple's New Map

#158

Post by pat2man »

dwighttk wrote: post #125

I just want a mode where I can see a list of directions without starting turn by turn navigation. I grew up in a time before turn by turn, and I do find it useful the VERY few times I'm driving in completely new locations. But most of the time I just want to see an overview of how to get to a place and then maybe when it is time to get the last 2 or 3 turns read aloud to me. But no, as soon as a choose a route my pho…

Apple Maps when using CarPlay does this pretty well. You can use overview mode on the car display which gives you a map of your whole route. A list of instructions comes up on your phone.

Re: Apple's New Map

#159

Post by ajmurmann »

starchild_3001 wrote: post #130

I've been finding Apple's 3D maps a spectacular success over Google's for a while. Yes, they do make it easier to find the building you're looking for. And, give visual clues about where you should be driving. Very little clutter, large fonts make it easier to see the map on your car dashboard. Well done, Apple!

How is the live traffic integration? I've been using Waze exclusively because of traffic data. I'm otherwise not very fond of the app and would love to move to something else, but the highly accurate and current traffic info is just such a time saver

Re: Apple's New Map

#160

Post by ehsankia »

nazca wrote: post #133

I think the author missed that the old version, and Google Maps currently, typically use green to denote certain types of public land (parks, national forest, etc.) not vegetation per se. Apple is solving a different use case by color coding by vegetation. And It's one that I think is less useful. KNowing that there is vegetation on someone else's private land isn't really that useful to me. But knowing the boundarie…

Indeed. Having hyper accurate greenery mapping may make for a cool tech demo, but has very little utility. Maps are about information density and color utility. Having 10 different shades of green doesn't really convey anything that's useful for my normal usecase.
Post reply on HN