
Google has an iOS 6 Maps app awaiting approval - uptown
http://9to5mac.com/2012/09/20/google-has-an-ios-6-maps-app-awaiting-approval-it-is-solely-up-to-apple-to-approve/
======
steevdave
I really do hope they do.

I've been using the beta and all through it, there were no routing apps
available for my area (San Antonio, so not exactly a tiny city, according to
Wikipedia we are the 7th largest population wise)

Now that iOS 6 is out, I decided to give the Maps app a shot again. So I
pulled it up, thought for a second since I am used to the old interface,
clicked the wrong thing a couple times, finally got to where I needed to go.
Scrolled through the saved list of directions that I've used in the past (very
helpful). Clicked the bus button. Got routed to the App Store. There were 8 or
so apps to pick from. Which ones sucked and which ones didn't, no idea. It's
too new to tell.

Picked one at random, it's 99 cents, which is fine, I don't mind buying apps.
It installs. And then sits there. Wait for a bit, maybe it's thinking or
something (I'm on an iPhone 4, not 4S or 5). Okay, it's not. Go back into the
maps app. It hasn't saved where I am, I'm back to the default screen. This
time I remember so I go back to the directions. Click the bus button. Get
routed back to the App Store again. This time the app I have says ROUTE. So I
click it. It shows some introduction screen. I click the start button.
Directions are blank.

Go back into maps, back to the directions, click the bus button, back to the
App Store, click the route button, and the in the routing app, are two _very_
different addresses than the ones I entered in to the Maps app. Scratch my
head wondering how that happened.

Close Maps, close the routing app, delete the routing app, launch
maps.google.com, get the bus schedule almost immediately.

I have no idea what anyone else's experiences are, but I have never been so
disappointed.

Now as mentioned, I'm still on the iPhone 4, and I'm at the tail end of the
contract, I believe next month is when I qualify for the upgrade without
paying full price. I'm seriously looking at the S3, although the new report of
the exploit via NFC is a bit troubling. I'm not particularly worried about the
apps I've purchased on the iPhone. I've spent maybe 150 on apps on the almost
2 years I've had the phone, and as I was talking about it to a friend, he
pointed out that as a smoker, I spend more than that _per month_ on
cigarettes, which really put things into perspective for me.

Never has Apple tastes so sour.

~~~
masklinn
> I have no idea what anyone else's experiences are, but I have never been so
> disappointed.

Not being in the US, google maps has never provided any kind of mass transit
information. Apple's implementation not providing it doesn't really change
anything.

The imprecision of the map, though, that's a problem (because it _is_ a step
back)

~~~
andrewaylett
I'm not sure whether you're specifically talking about Google's maps on iOS or
not, but Google's web and Android maps clients both provide bus and train
times for much of the UK.

~~~
masklinn
> I'm not sure whether you're specifically talking about Google's maps on iOS
> or not

I'm talking about Google Maps in general.

> Google's web and Android maps clients both provide bus and train times for
> much of the UK.

Good on you for living in the 51st state I guess? Many still get neither.

~~~
koalaman
in many cases they can't offer it because the transit authorities do not wish
to provide that data to Google.

~~~
masklinn
I'm not saying it's Google's fault (I know it very likely isn't). steevdave
opened the door to other people's experience re. mass transit on Google Maps
versus Apple Maps, I gave mine.

------
runjake
Jim Dalrymple (who is an unofficial mouthpiece for Apple) says nope:

[http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/09/20/on-the-rumor-that-
goog...](http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/09/20/on-the-rumor-that-google-has-
submitted-an-ios-6-maps-app-and-apple-is-sitting-on-it/)

If I were Google, I'd hold off on releasing a Maps for iOS just a little
while. It's firmly in the "killer app" category at the moment and might help
spur Android adoption just a little.

~~~
Steko
"If I were Google, I'd hold off on releasing a Maps for iOS just a little
while. It's firmly in the "killer app" category at the moment and might help
spur Android adoption just a little."

Based on this logic google should withhold search (after contract runs out)
and only serve youtube in VP8. Releasing Maps soon but not immediately for
Google (which is what it looks like they are doing) wins in several ways:

(1) reap the benefits of Apple's Maps launch negative publicity for a couple
weeks.

(2) once your app hits, more people are using your services. Google loves
people doing this.

(3) and less people using Apple Maps and helping improve it. Keeps the gap
wide.

(4) finally, if not approved, you can use the disapproval as another
competitive advantage.

~~~
boundlessdreamz
Nope. Maps is a huge differentiator. Search & Youtube is not. Windows and
Android phones have good maps, iOS doesn't. No one will care much if the
search is switched to bing or if youtube was not available as an app. Also
youtube makes it money via ads which it shows in the latest app. I don't think
google is monetizing maps much.

~~~
chrischen
I agree YouTube may not be, but search is pretty big. However, Google would
have a hard time blocking google.com from iPhone users without being
anticompetitive.

They can not expend the effort to create a google maps app for iphone, but
that's not the same as being actively anticompetitive as they would have to be
if they wanted to block search from iPhone users.

~~~
boundlessdreamz
Sorry. You missed the point. Google wants as many people to use youtube &
search. It makes money via ads on both. Having it as default is good (google
pays money to FF to be default for example) and even if it is not the default,
people can use google by typing google.com in safari. From there, the
experience is identical.

Similarly for youtube, google wants the widest audience. Wider the audience,
more the ads and more money.

If apple switches from google to bing for safari default, apple gets to spite
google a bit and google may lose quite a bit of traffic. This hurts Google.
Google will never want to block iOS users from search or youtube.

Secondly, neither is a competitive advantage in smartphone markets. No one is
going to switch platforms for either search or youtube.

Maps on the other hand, does not have much advertising. The previous app did
not have any advertising at all. They got location data from it but they can
get that from android phones. Google loses nothing if they don't release an
app. If they don't release an app, it is a great advantage for android. So
they have a tradeoff to make, whether to maintain that competitive advantage
or release a maps app and gain some audience. If I were google, I wouldn't
release maps. For the first time ever, android is way way ahead of iOS in one
of the core features.

~~~
gldnspud
Incorrect: the maps app in iOS < 6 had plenty of ads in the form of sponsored
listings. I can recall several times on a road trip recently where I searched
for a point of interest, and got a sponsored listing... Sometimes it was right
on top of the non-sponsored point, so I had to zoom in really far just to be
able to select the desired pin.

iOS maps is basically another ad platform... And with iOS 6 being adopted at a
high rate, Google would lose all those "eyeballs" and crowd sourced data if
they didn't release their own iOS maps app.

~~~
boundlessdreamz
Ok. I stand corrected :) I have never seen a sponsored listing. I still think
maps as a product is not dependent on ads like search or youtube is.

------
nthitz
Even if it is approved and released shortly it still doesn't solve the problem
of it not being the default Map app. Contact links & location links will still
open in Apple's Maps. Still waiting on something comparable to Android's
Intents in iOS

~~~
sitharus
There's already a similar mechanism in the URL handlers, but Apple don't let
you choose which application to use if multiple ones are registered. This
still bugs me.

I'd also like widgets one day.

~~~
masklinn
> There's already a similar mechanism in the URL handlers, but Apple don't let
> you choose which application to use if multiple ones are registered.

It also doesn't let you override core applications (in that it picks the first
one either way), and last time I checked it if two applications registered the
same handler and you removed the first one, the association didn't switch to
the second one it just broke.

May have been fixed since.

> I'd also like widgets one day.

I just want toggles in the notification bar (DND, airplane, 3G, roaming and
location would be sufficient as far as I'm concerned). Instead of the waste of
space that Stocks is (yes I know I can remove it from the notification center,
and did)

~~~
sitharus
> > There's already a similar mechanism in the URL handlers, but Apple don't
> let you choose which application to use if multiple ones are registered. >
> It also doesn't let you override core applications

Hence "Apple don't let you choose which application to use" - it all happens
at Apple's whim, and currently that excludes replacing system apps.

------
soupysoupysoup
How does "competes with existing functionality" not wake up the antitrust
regulators? Wasn't the entire IE shipping with Windows situation based on a
competitive functionality?

~~~
masklinn
> antitrust regulators?

> antitrust |ˌantēˈtrəst; ˌantī-|

> adjective [ attrib. ]

> of or relating to legislation preventing or controlling _trusts or other
> monopolies_ , with the intention of promoting competition in business.

In pretty much every thread about Apple on this site, you will be reminded
that Android enjoys amazing sales.

> Wasn't the entire IE shipping with Windows situation based on a competitive
> functionality?

Microsoft was found to be a de-facto monopoly on the desktop.

~~~
recoiledsnake
>In pretty much every thread about Apple on this site, you will be reminded
that Android enjoys amazing sales.

And in the same threads and on Apple blogs like Gruber's and Siegler, you're
constantly reminded how it doesn't matter because Apple takes ~75% of the
profits, and statistics on how apps are more profitable on iOS because Apple
users are the premium users willing to pay and how many Android users are too
cheap to buy apps. So if you're an app maker looking to make money, iOS is
pretty much close to a monopoly if you're trying to make money.

~~~
tsunamifury
Its only a monopoly if you are very narrow minded about the market. Brew and
J2ME have multi-billion dollar app markets that compete with Apple and Android
in terms of volume.

~~~
fpgeek
Citation please?

So far as I know, Nokia was a leader in non/pre-iOS/Android app markets. For
some reason I think their results weren't competitive with iOS or even
Android...

------
nostromo
This map uproar seems a tad hyperbolic.

I used it this morning and I was actually pleasantly surprised. My map
experience wasn't worse as I expected, but actually much better with turn by
turn.

The people most upset seem to generally be edge cases. I'm sure Apple will
work those out as complaints roll in.

Google has had 7 years to perfect maps. Apple feels maybe a year behind in
some respects and a year ahead in others, but definitely not 7 years behind.

~~~
recoiledsnake
>The people most upset seem to generally be edge cases

I love it how you dismiss 99% of people and the globe as an edge case by your
anecdote of it working well for you.

Let me take a guess, you live on the West Coast where Apple engineers live?

~~~
mirkules
The OP's point is that this feels a lot like Antennagate 2010, where a large
number of non-Apple users latched onto the fact that there was _something_
wrong with Apple products, and complained louder than the actual Apple users.
At this point, we can call all the evidence anecdotal until we see some hard
numbers on how much map data is actually incorrect, and what actual percentage
of the population is affected (I'm not holding my breath for that data,
though).

I agree, though, that Apple rushed in prematurely with a new version of Maps
-- either they screwed up big time engineering/management wise, or their hand
was forced business-wise (I'm leaning towards the latter).

So putting the "outrage" aside for a moment, how well do maps work on your
phone, and did you notice any problems so far?

~~~
fpgeek
To me, Google's tone at their pre-WWDC Maps event (and the effort they made to
demonstrate things on iOS devices) doesn't seem consistent with the hypothesis
that they decided to force Apple's hand.

~~~
ryanhuff
Its entirely plausible that Google framed the map situation one way publicly,
but another with Apple in private.

~~~
fpgeek
Possible, yes. But given the way many people criticized Google's tone at the
time (nervous, etc.) it doesn't seem likely to me.

------
nachteilig
Thank god. I'm holding off on upgrading to iOS 6 until this is released, so it
will be very welcome. I live in a city, so accurate location data is important
to me (and I prefer not to use the web based google maps because I don't want
to give safari permission to use location data)!

~~~
xuki
Note that you don't have to give location data to all websites. You can allow
maps.google.com and deny others.

------
kyleslattery
Jim Dalrymple says no: [http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/09/20/on-the-rumor-
that-goog...](http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/09/20/on-the-rumor-that-google-
has-submitted-an-ios-6-maps-app-and-apple-is-sitting-on-it/)

~~~
fpgeek
Dueling anonymous sources. Wonderful.

That being said, 9to5Mac seems to emphasize that an app was submitted and Jim
Dalrymple seems to emphasize that it isn't sitting in review.

There's one simple way those could be consistent: an app could have been
submitted and rejected. Google's and Apple's different points-of-view might
even be giving us the contrasting spins on the situation.

------
qq66
If this is true, then Google is making a catastrophically bad tactical error,
or Apple Maps are not as horrendously awful as the blogosphere is making them
out to be (haven't had a chance to try them myself).

~~~
Tichy
This was Apple's decision, not Google's.

~~~
qq66
Sorry - I meant the decision to put an App in the App Store. If the Apple Maps
are bad as people seem to be proclaiming, Google should let iOS 6 brew up ill
will with Apple's customer base, especially since Apple users tend to upgrade
their OS's immediately, and use it to promote Android.

~~~
jlgreco
You could alternatively see this situation as Google signaling that they are
willing to act in the best interests of the consumer even if it means
sacrificing strategy, putting them in stark contrast with Apple in the eyes of
the people who are critical of Apple's new mapping application (ie, the people
who are going to be deciding to continue using Google's maps.)

~~~
qq66
I don't think that the typical consumer's understanding of technology industry
dynamics is deep enough for this to be relevant. I think the decision is more
like, "Steve's phone's maps suck, I don't want that phone."

After all, all of these companies have faced huge amounts of criticism (Apple
for worker's conditions, Google for its actions in China, Facebook for privacy
issues), and they don't seem to meaningfully erode consumer enthusiasm.

~~~
jlgreco
You're right. I think the thought process likely to go through most consumers
heads is either:

 _"This new maps thing sucks. Oh look, I can get Google's maps again. Thanks
Google!"_

or

 _"This new maps sucks. Oh well, the rest of the phone is great."_

Google passing up the chance to keep people who already like one of their
products happy on the off chance that they can pry Apple consumers away from
Apple doesn't strike me as the best decision in the world.

~~~
qq66
Do most users actively know that the tiles in the iOS 5 Maps application are
served by Google? The app itself is Apple top to bottom -- the display does
say "Google" in the lower-left-hand corner -- but it would be interesting to
know how users think of their iPhone maps application.

~~~
jlgreco
I should imagine that anyone who cares enough to become distressed by Apple's
maps will be able to figure it out.

------
ChuckMcM
Ok, this is an interesting twist to the story. See my comments elsewhere on
why I don't think an App version of Google Maps would see the light of day (if
it did that would definitely count as 'plan C' in my book).

Fun times.

~~~
guimarin
Apple lost this particular battle ( mobile search ) the day Google bought
Android. OSM is cool as we know, but it was not deployed until now, and the
reaction is epic. Apple will fight the good fight like bing is doing in web
search, but ultimately will be found wanting, just like bing. The only f-u
play Apple has left is to spend billions of dollars making OSM on par with
GoogleMaps, contributing that knowledge 'upstream,'watching specialized maps
services eat google maps' ad lunch. I seriously doubt that would happen, but
it's the only play left. "If I can't play then no one can..."

~~~
Tichy
I had this idea recently of splitting the internet into two internets: one for
Apple fans and one for Apple haters. Apart from getting rid of a lot of
flamewars, Apple could rule supreme in the Apple internet, be the best search
engine there and so on. If you never know that there are better options, you
can be happy.

------
ars
This is blogspam.

Original:
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2012/sep/20/apple-...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2012/sep/20/apple-
google-maps-headache)

------
uptown
Or this story:

Source: Google Hopes To Have iOS Maps App In The App Store “Before Christmas”

<http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/20/crap-maps>

------
gleiva
After checking out the bunch of complaints, I wonder what's going on with
Apple's quality process. They must had seen some of this 'roller coaster
street' bugs before... They either sacrificed quality for getting the product
out soon... Or maybe they are assuming most of fans won't care about the bugs
just because they'll get the new phone anyway... Or their quality process just
needs some improvements.

------
CCs
How about TomTom for iPhone?

[http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/tomtom-u.s.-mexico/id35568237...](http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/tomtom-u.s.-mexico/id355682375)

Yes, it costs $60 + in-app purchase for more frequent updates, but still, at
least it is accurate.

~~~
fpgeek
Um, doesn't Apple source much of their underlying data from TomTom? Absent
incredible stupidity on one side and/or the other could TomTom really be
holding out on them?

------
yalogin
The problem is there is no other company that does maps and so Apple cannot
even buy some one to fill the gap. They are now forced to grow/improve the
maps organically, which will take some time. But this is Apple they will get
there.

------
michaelkscott
Seriously, why wouldn't Apple approve it? Which of their terms will this app
violate?

~~~
masklinn
"Duplicates a native service" would be my guess". "We'll refuse what the fuck
we want" is an other possibility.

~~~
jmelloy
I don't believe they've used that in a while. They let Chrome & Sparrow on
without any complaints.

~~~
dvhh
but they are both severly crippled on iOS, chrome is just a safari skin, and
sparrow cannot be used as a default app for mail on iOS cannot use
notification for new mail unless using 3rd party services (if you are trusting
them with you email credentials).

~~~
CraigRood
Doesn't that come down to API limitations rather than actual functionality?

------
mrintegrity
Is it just me or has Apple "slavishly" copied the google maps app
functionality, icons (that arrow looks like a copy paste) and rounded corners?

The hypocrisy here is just mind blowing.. And it clearly demonstrates the
utter bullshitness that is there fight against Samsung

~~~
shinratdr
> And it clearly demonstrates the utter bullshitness that is there fight
> against Samsung

The only thing it demonstrates is that you have no idea what you're taking
about. The app "functionality" is "being a map" something Google has never
patented. The UI elements are Apples, as they designed and built the iOS Maps
app.

The only thing here that's a slavish copy is your comment. Reminds me strongly
of the comments of a million other uninformed idiots that barely understand
the concept they are trying to deride, yet insist it is hypocritical.

Yeah, it's the worst hypocrisy to use assets you designed and a concept that
can't be patented in a new app. I heard Apple has a calendar app too? Is that
also a slavish copy of Google Calendar?

Apple didn't sue everyone who made a phone FFS. They sued Samsung, a company
that genuinely did rip them off and try as hard as they can to present Android
and their devices as much closer to the iPhone than anything else.

Apple isn't doing a single thing that's similar with Maps. They're just making
a Maps app. Google doesn't own the concept of mobile mapping.

~~~
tycorc
This patent war is ridiculous, and even more ridiculous that so many people
are now convinced that apple is merited with their claims. Patent laws have
turned into a scary world for creative design, no one is safe. Here's a great
article giving some insight into why maybe apple isn't so innocent after all;

[http://www.dailytech.com/Samsung+Apples+iPhone+Started+as+So...](http://www.dailytech.com/Samsung+Apples+iPhone+Started+as+Sony+Ripoff/article25277.htm)

------
cooldeal
Wonder how this jives with Gruber's comments on the maps situation:

>Using Maps to Improve Maps

>> Scott Rafer:

>>What’s missing from this conversation is that map usage is critical. […]
Google’s maps are going to start degrading. Apple’s will get better. They’ll
meet in the middle within 18 months.

>The idea is that you need to collect usage data to improve your data. The
only way for Apple to get from here to there is to release what they have now
and improve the data as millions of people start using it.

<http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/09/19/rafer-maps>

If Google Maps is approved, far less people would be using Apple Maps.

~~~
capo
Why would GMaps degrade in quality? Apple's might improve but Google's are on
Android devices, and they have another key data source in StreetView.

~~~
lftl
I think Gruber was postulating that Apple would continue updating the app to
take advantage of iOS in deeper ways while Google wouldn't put the same level
of effort into the iOS version of the app, making it stagnate. So more of
degrading of the iOS experience than anything related to map data.

~~~
brown9-2
He wrote "Google’s maps are going to start degrading", not that their app
would degrade. He seems to imply that with less iOS users, they'd get less
corrections - which ignores the large userbase of Google Maps on other
platforms (Android, web).

------
capo
_Duplicates a native service_

Surly it can't be legal for Apple to potentially reject an app on such
grounds?! and on that subject where is the talkative Google search update?

[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/building-search-
engin...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/building-search-engine-of-
future-one.html)

~~~
enjo
They can legally do whatever they want. They've pulled apps before for the
same rule. It's part of playing in Apple's ecosystem. As a developer you
always take the risk that Apple will decide to wield the ban-hammer, and you
basically have no recourse.

~~~
mmanfrin
Just like Microsoft could legally do what they wanted on windows vis-a-vis
Netscape and IE.

~~~
arrrg
They couldn’t because they were a monopoly.

Apple is so far from being a monopoly, it’s not even funny.

