71–80 of 123 posts
I discovered that Google Maps is consuming a huge amount of data, several GB during my last vacation, nearly depleting my contingent. How does Apple Maps compare?
Even if Apple Maps doesn't have as much data as Google, the experience is so much better. Makes a lot of sense that Google is copying it as per the article. Whenever I use Google Maps, it constantly harasses me about how there's a slowdown ahead, puts a little tray across the bottom of the screen hiding the information I care about, with no way to get rid of it except tapping and other nonsense. I searched throughout…
The free labor I've provided them is probably enough to cover an entire neighbourhood already :)
I still don't understand why Apple map is so bad compared to OpenStreetMap given that they contribute a lot to it (they are even the biggest company contributor to OSM). There must be a reason, legal or something, but why don't they just use OSM as a default for places they didn't map by themselves? [1]: https://www.gislounge.com/openstreetmap-one-of-the-worlds-la...
I think it might be because Apple will have to give visible attribution to OpenStreetMaps, which may attract users towards it to the detriment of Apple maps.
"© OpenStreetMap and other data providers"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect they want to review and check every inch of OSM in an area before they import it. Just incase someone has hidden something extremely offensive within the dataset, and deliberately mutilated the maps to create funny images etc Google had a few very public cases of people using their open contribution process to embed images of Android, penises and hate symbols into their maps. All this created a huge about o…
Maybe that's the reason. It sounds a bit extreme but given the control culture of the company that would make sense. > All this created a huge about of negative PR Probably not that huge though, given I've never heard of it before :).
Oh and I suppose OP, so 66%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect they want to review and check every inch of OSM in an area before they import it. Just incase someone has hidden something extremely offensive within the dataset, and deliberately mutilated the maps to create funny images etc Google had a few very public cases of people using their open contribution process to embed images of Android, penises and hate symbols into their maps. All this created a huge about o…
Maybe that's the reason. It sounds a bit extreme but given the control culture of the company that would make sense. > All this created a huge about of negative PR Probably not that huge though, given I've never heard of it before :).
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/05/google-temporarily-s...
I’m on the big island of Hawaii and Apple Maps is basically useless. I can’t find my hostel by name. I also can’t find it by address . It’s just very bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why do they contribute then?!
They do use OpenStreetMaps data and give attribution to them as one of their sources. But if they were to only use OSM's data, people would cry foul that Apple maps is not giving them clear and visible attribution (for e.g. by adding a "OpenStreetMap" label on the map you are viewing in Apple Maps). Right now, except for maps source providers that legally require Apple to provide visible attribution somewhere in thei…
I’m using Apple Maps for the app that I’m developing now. The alternative would not have been Google Maps. It would have been MapBox. Google Maps will give app developers like me severe sticker shock. I watched a friend of mine get it in the shorts (forcing him to switch to MapBox). After watching that, I decided that I will never depend on Google services as a linchpin technology. In fact, it simply hardened my reso…
> I’m using Apple Maps for the app that I’m developing now. The alternative would not have been Google Maps. It would have been MapBox. It's easy to make a theoretical stance like this, but Apple Maps and Google Maps are free in an iOS app, but MapBox is not. If you were forced to switch off Apple Maps for some reason, it seems likely the free option would win out. > it simply hardened my resolve to avoid third-party…
Google API is not free. It would be at least a 4-digit cost per month. I think that my friend was hit with a $1,500/mo nut. Google changed terms (back when they started demanding that all users of the API give credit card numbers). His app is fairly popular, and he'd need to pay them for the SDK.
> all of these libraries are third-party dependencies...
I've been relying on Apple's toolkits since 1986. They've pulled a couple of stunts (OpenDoc, anyone?), but they have been a reliable partner, for the most part.
> If we're talking just about the javascript API
I don't do JS. I do native Swift. It would require embedding their API. My friend did that, and it was far more cost-effective. Lot less than Google (he sells his app for $0.99, and it's not popular enough to do much more than pay for itself). MapBox is quite nice. His app is native ObjC. He's had it out for quite a while. He originally started with Google's API, as that was the only one that offered the particular services he needed.
Most of the stuff I write is free, open-source. I could probably get Google to let us use it for free (we're a 501(c)(3)), but I've already seen them turn the screws once, and I'm in no mind to set myself up for something like them deciding that we could give them a tithe.
Also, I have had some ... issues ... with third-party libraries. I'm quite particular about the Quality of my work, and I find that not too many others share my passion.