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

Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

justinobeirne.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#21

Post by joosters »

https://maps.apple.com/imagecollection/privacy/uk/en/privacy... has this comment on the historical image collection:

To ensure that Apple was applying the best image blurring technology possible, Apple conducted an entire year of test drives through the US and Europe in 2015, where it did not publish any of the imagery collected during these drives but used it instead to improve Apple’s technology such as image blurring techniques on such objects as faces and license plates.

This might explain some part of the delay between the earliest data collection and publication.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#22

Post by netsharc »

brundolf wrote: post #18
johnfn wrote: post #4

I love this type of article, and the effort put into it - but the main thing I can't help but do is wonder what kind of person is driven to exhaustively research Apple Maps over a 5+ year period.

I will also say it took way too long to get to the point. Several points that could've been made with 1-2 examples had 5-6. It got a little exhausting.

After too much scrolling just now, I remember a similar-looking article, also about Apple Maps, from a few years ago that was probably from this same blog.

His style is way too many illustrations and a few lines of text in between. Feels buzzfeedy. Sorry, just not for me.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#24

Post by dljsjr »

buu700 wrote: post #20

Did anyone else misinterpret the title and think it was about the educational "Look Around You"[1] series? 1: https://vimeo.com/60825116

"Look Around You" is satire from Peter Serafinowicz… Educational is a bit of a generous description.

That said, Look Around You is hilarious.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#25

Post by lucideer »

TL;DR since most people (understandably) didn't have the patience to read through the lengthy, drawn out, repetitious build-up of false-endings in the article:

It looks like Apple threw away all data collected by their first (van-based) Look Around driving effort in the US. All released imagery is from their most recent Subaru-based re-driving of the US.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#26

Post by yoda_sl »

ardy42 wrote: post #13
tobr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is also listed on several mapping-related patents for Apple over the past several years.[1] It seems surprisingly un-Apple-y to allow someone in that position to publish articles detailing the flaws in Apple maps, speculate about where they get their data and how the quality problems might affect unannounced future products. 1: https://patents.justia.com/inventor/justin-o-beirne

> It seems surprisingly un-Apple-y to allow someone in that position to publish articles detailing the flaws in Apple maps, speculate about where they get their data and how the quality problems might affect unannounced future products. That tells me he no longer works at Apple. If he did, why would he need to speculate about Apple's internal processes based on what they publicly release? This article ( https://www.j…

Yes he used to work at Apple in the Maps team for many years but left a few years ago... thus his guess.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#27

Post by maparticle »

joosters wrote: post #21

https://maps.apple.com/imagecollection/privacy/uk/en/privacy... has this comment on the historical image collection: To ensure that Apple was applying the best image blurring technology possible, Apple conducted an entire year of test drives through the US and Europe in 2015, where it did not publish any of the imagery collected during these drives but used it instead to improve Apple’s technology such as image blurr…

This still doesn’t explain what was uncovered with the New York images. If Apple shipped them a month after collecting them (and if Apple has spend the past 5+ years driving), then why are so many areas missing Apple’s Street View?

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#28

Post by michaelt »

coldtea wrote: post #8

> ...seem to suggest that Apple might be having issues algorithmically identifying POI information in its imagery. And if that’s the case, it raises interesting questions regarding Apple’s overall mapping effort... Really? The quote sounds grandiose, but what "interesting questions" does it raise, aside from "it's not perfect" (who would have thought) and "what else might be missing?"?

Perhaps the article has been updated since you wrote this, but it no longer mentions "interesting questions" and instead includes a footnote saying if they can't annotate these images, that doesn't bode well for their rumoured AR headset.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#29

Post by maparticle »

netsharc wrote: post #22
brundolf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will also say it took way too long to get to the point. Several points that could've been made with 1-2 examples had 5-6. It got a little exhausting.

After too much scrolling just now, I remember a similar-looking article, also about Apple Maps, from a few years ago that was probably from this same blog. His style is way too many illustrations and a few lines of text in between. Feels buzzfeedy. Sorry, just not for me.

Disagree. I enjoyed the investigative style and liked being able to follow along as the author laid out the evidence.

I’d rather see how the they came to their conclusions than read a bunch of bullet points.

Re: Why doesn’t “Look Around” cover more areas?

#30

Post by brundolf »

netsharc wrote: post #22
brundolf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will also say it took way too long to get to the point. Several points that could've been made with 1-2 examples had 5-6. It got a little exhausting.

After too much scrolling just now, I remember a similar-looking article, also about Apple Maps, from a few years ago that was probably from this same blog. His style is way too many illustrations and a few lines of text in between. Feels buzzfeedy. Sorry, just not for me.

I appreciate his thoroughness, it just makes it hard to read when the reader doesn't actually care about seeing every single data point. I would prefer he give an "abstract" at the top and then go into all the details below.
Post reply on HN