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

On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 58 posts

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#41

Post by CamperBob2 »

guywithabike wrote: post #33
mcantelon wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What he doesn't answer is why they chose to ship a half-backed map implementation rather than continue to pay licensing fees until they got it right. It's not like Apple's starving for cash.

> rather than continue to pay licensing fees until they got it right It's not like you just buy the data at Wal-Mart -- you have to negotiate licensing terms with Google and the terms that Google wanted were, reportedly, onerous.

Gee, that almost sounds like something worth considering before starting a thermonuclear war.

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#42

Post by cooldeal »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #38
recoiledsnake wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could've tried licensing far better map data from Navteq/Nokia like Amazon recently did for the Kindles by using some of their 100 billion dollar stash. Amazon did not try to roll out its own maps with half baked data. Whether Nokia would have been willing to license to Apple is a different question.

Or they could have tried not bringing a water gun to a thermonuclear war.

I think Apple doesn't really care at this point where the iPhone is essentially a cash cow five years after launch with 600K apps in the app store. Incremental improvements are enough to sell millions on launch and later with many people guaranteed to buy it regardless of how many flaws it has.

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#43

Post by nivloc »

wizzard wrote: post #27
swang wrote: post #5

Gruber essentially tiptoes around the main problem. The iOS 6 map app was released before it was polished up to what people expect from Apple. "Oh Apple had to release it now or else Apple would have to release in a non major release!" Are you kidding me? The alternative being to release a terrible version that tarnishes their brand, that is way better alternative

Gruber is trying to make it out to be this chess game of when to release the new map app, but never addresses the main issue: Was it ready? I guess if you're crowdsourcing map data the only way to start improving it is to get it out there. But don't act like it's all mind games and strategery and say that Google knew that Apple knew that Google knew that Apple was going to drop Google for maps. Reading the past coupl…

I'd say it was, or at least as ready as it could have been. Problem is that everyone is behind Google on Maps. They're on Mars, everyone else is playing with baking soda and vinegar at Cape Canaveral.

Apple would have to acquiesce to Google on a lot of fronts to get better maps features (that are a major improvement in many places), and get stuck working on something that could never compare in perpetuity. Launch or die, right?

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#44

Post by mattparcher »

cheald wrote: post #12

> Technically, they could roll such a thing out in a 6.1 or 6.2 update, but major changes — and I think everybody can agree this has been a major change, for users and app developers alike — should be delivered only in major new OS updates. Well, I personally can't wait for OS XI, since by that criteria, Apple apparently hasn't released a major OS update since OS X yet. Version numbers schmersion numbers. Ship it whe…

(I understand that you’re probably being somewhat sarcastic, but for the sake of semantics…)

It’s pretty clear by the amount of change (and Apple’s marketing efforts) that each OS 10.#.0 release is a "major" OS update, on par with the relative significance of each iOS #.0 release.

But Gruber may have over-generalized here. Indeed, Apple has added major new features in iOS .# updates, e.g. AirPlay and AirPrint in 4.2, or the Personal Hotspot feature in 4.3.

What they haven’t done is change key functionality in a point update, let alone introduce regressions. (In fact, before this incident, I’m struggling to recall Apple ever removing/crippling existing functionality.) If they were going to perform a full Maps switch-out, maybe they felt that now would be the best time, if only because there is so much positive press out there to temper the backlash.

Edit: Regarding removed features, I was mostly thinking of Apple’s record with iOS. As gurkendoktor points out, they have certainly removed ("simplified") functionality in Mac OS X, often creating great frustration.

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#45

Post by codeka »

ryanb wrote: post #8
swang wrote: post #5

Gruber essentially tiptoes around the main problem. The iOS 6 map app was released before it was polished up to what people expect from Apple. "Oh Apple had to release it now or else Apple would have to release in a non major release!" Are you kidding me? The alternative being to release a terrible version that tarnishes their brand, that is way better alternative

His main suggestion is that Apple couldn't get enough data to make it good without launching the app, and they had to go ahead and release it at some point. The software works quite well - it's the dataset that's inferior.

They could have rolled it out as a standalone app first, with the clear goal being that they want users to try it out and report issues. There's no reason the first version had to replace the google-backed one.

I'm sure there'd be thousands of people willing to give it a go, and people would be much more forgiving of errors if it wasn't the only option.

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#47

Post by cma »

mitchty wrote: post #24
recoiledsnake wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't the APIs stay constant while the supplied data/backend gets changed? After all, isn't that the whole point of having a public API so that the implementation can be changed without changing the calling apps?

They could, but Core Location in iOS 6 uses the backend data for things like getting your car route. If I recall correctly Google doesn't let you use their api for things like that. Basically removing the Maps app is one thing, removing new OS features that use the same frameworks is another.

Wouldn't moving from Google to Apple maps be adding the new OS features rather than removing them?

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#48

Post by gurkendoktor »

mattparcher wrote: post #44
cheald wrote: post #12

> Technically, they could roll such a thing out in a 6.1 or 6.2 update, but major changes — and I think everybody can agree this has been a major change, for users and app developers alike — should be delivered only in major new OS updates. Well, I personally can't wait for OS XI, since by that criteria, Apple apparently hasn't released a major OS update since OS X yet. Version numbers schmersion numbers. Ship it whe…

(I understand that you’re probably being somewhat sarcastic, but for the sake of semantics…) It’s pretty clear by the amount of change (and Apple’s marketing efforts) that each OS 10.#.0 release is a "major" OS update, on par with the relative significance of each iOS #.0 release. But Gruber may have over-generalized here. Indeed, Apple has added major new features in iOS .# updates, e.g. AirPlay and AirPrint in 4.2,…

> In fact, before this incident, I’m struggling to recall Apple ever removing/crippling existing functionality

Mac OS X has had plenty of that. You buy a Mac Mini with a remote so you can use Front Row, and bam, Front Row's gone. But that is probably why Mac users are a lot more careful with updating their systems than iOS users are/were.

Re: On the Timing of Apple’s Map Switch

#50

Post by mcantelon »

nivloc wrote: post #37
mcantelon wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What he doesn't answer is why they chose to ship a half-backed map implementation rather than continue to pay licensing fees until they got it right. It's not like Apple's starving for cash.

That's pretty much what the entire article is about, no?

It's about the timing of the decision, not the underlying rationale for the decision to move away from Google Maps at the cost of user experience.

Gruber says only:

>If Apple had stuck with Google Maps for another year they would have been forced to renegotiate with Google in a situation where both sides at the table would know that Apple ... had to agree to whatever terms Google demanded to extend the deal

Does Apple somehow have less leverage in the past? They can always use App Store gatekeeping as leverage. Perhaps Gruber is implying that Apple's antagonism towards Google's ally Samsung means it will receive unfavorable terms?

Even if Apple has to pay a bit more one would think it would be worth it given that Apple has lots of cash and the risk of shipping a poor maps implementation is losing further marketshare to Android.

Post reply on HN