
Google Maps' advantage over Apple Maps - sern
http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=399
======
hythloday
"[Apple's] problem is that they thought they did not have a problem."

Crucial insight, there. From the perspective of an observer who has no special
affection for Apple, it's surprising that a company of that competence would
succumb to such a basic process error.

~~~
peteretep
This is the first event that people will put down to a lack of Steve Jobs that
I think actually might reflect that...

~~~
0x006A
the decision to switch to there own maps was made while jobs was around. its
also not the first time apple replaces a product with an inferior option and
insists its better, final cut pro x comes to mind.

~~~
agumonkey
Didn't they address user concerns with a .1 upgrade or was it a placebo pill ?

~~~
0x006A
nothing really changed with .1, they added some placebo fixes, like xml
import/export (except that its a new xml format that only represents trivial
edits and thus is useless).

------
yock
What is most amusing to me about this whole thing is that two weeks ago The
Atlantic published[0] an article offering incredible insight into just how
much effort goes into making Google's maps so good. Was it already too late at
that point for Apple to see this and think that maybe they hadn't thought this
thing through? The only alternatives I can think of are blindingly foolish.
Either they thought they engineered their way out of a problem at which Google
throws literally _hundreds_ of people or they didn't bother to read the
article in the first place.

0 - [http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-
go...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-
builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/)

~~~
Havoc
My thoughts exactly. I remember when I read the article about the Google
approach I thought...holy shit.

If the _best_ Google could come up with was throwing manpower at the problem
then anybody else should think really carefully about their solution if it
doesn't involve similar manpower.

------
zenocon
> My overall view of the companies that it (Apple) has assembled to create its
> application is that they are, as a whole, rated “C-grade” suppliers.

This just amazes me.

For the longest time there were really only two suppliers of data: Tele Atlas
and NAVTEQ. Everything else wasn't worth touching b/c the quality sucked. Then
Google collected their own in their little cars and stopped paying suppliers.
I'm not sure why Apple didn't have the foresight to understand this was an
enormous engineering effort from Google - not only collecting their own data
but the whole platform itself.

I worked as a consultant for one of the two major data suppliers for 3 years
rebuilding their backend. 400 years sounds like a reasonable swag.

~~~
blrgeek
Isn't the TomTom data really the Tele Atlas data set?

Apple has no lack of hubris - in some things they succeed spectacularly beyond
all expectations, and in others - well MobileMe, Ping, and now Maps...

~~~
zenocon
Yes, Tele Atlas was acquired by Tom Tom about 5-6 years ago, so it is the
same.

------
raldi
I'm sorry, but can someone paste the part of this article where Google
announces anything about 400 years? I can't find it.

~~~
prawks
I'm thinking it's a ploy to get people to read yet another criticism of
Apple's new maps.

We get it, they're bad.

EDIT: Frankly, I think it's pretty hilarious this article is so long and
formal.

~~~
ImprovedSilence
I actually found this article to be the first one that didn't just criticize
Apple, but actually made suggestions about how they should go about fixing it.
It was rather interesting for someone like me who has no experience in map
making, to see how much is really involved in digital cartography.

edit: on a related note, I always took google maps for granted, but now that I
realize how fantastic of an effort it must take to map the world to the degree
they do, I have much more respect for it, and I think it is amazing in terms
of "cataloging the worlds information".

~~~
martian
The Atlantic recently wrote up a nice piece on Google Maps. It explores just
how complex the whole operation is, how many humans and machines are involved
in making Google's maps...

[http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-
go...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-
builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/)

~~~
vsl
That article is a bit infamous for its over-the-top advertisement value by
now.

See e.g. <http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=394>

------
blrgeek
The article has no mention of _why_ this is a 400 year advantage - or how long
it will take for Apple to get over this.

He lays out very well that a human element is required to bring these streams
of data together. And Apple is not a company with the DNA of big data.

Just algorithmic manipulation of the data is not possible or sufficient - they
will need an army to integrate these streams and bring them up to par. And
Apple is even less happy to deal with an Army than Google was.

~~~
ericHosick
Maybe the 400 years referes to the number of people-years used to manually
clean up map information?

~~~
dvanduzer
So it's a problem that $4 billion could solve in a few days, right?

~~~
zalew
9 women won't give birth in a month.

~~~
dvanduzer
Ten developers each giving their boss a copy of Mythical Man Month won't make
him read it any faster either.

~~~
epo
Ha ha! One of the better variations on this oft misquoted old saying I have
read.

------
lispm
The article does not really provide much new information. That mapping is hard
is known. That there are companies who have much experience in this area and
that Apple will have to compete with them is known - from Google, over Garmin
to Nokia.

It's just that it is hard and that it will take Apple a lot of time and
investment to bring the mapping functionality to a better level. I'm pretty
sure Apple knows that.

It's just the first iteration. Apple works that way. Bring a product or
service in a first iteration and then improve from there. This is how the iPod
evolved, for example. Aperture, another example.

The current maps application in iOS already has a feedback interface. This
helps to improve the data.

But there are a few things which need more consideration:

* the 3d view looks ugly when looked at close to the objects. The 3d reconstruction algorithm which creates a 3d view from images is problematic.

* the angle of the data from Tomtom is for car users. Other users have less benefit: there is a lack of detail and the usage perspective renders the map in a certain way. For example here in Europe there are a lot of local public transit users. They have a hard time identifying useful informations on the current maps.

* combination with all kinds of POIs. You need to get that data and have it constantly updated. Where is a shop, when is it open, where is a museum, where are interesting views, where is a difficult road condition, ...

Probably the mapping domain is the toughest Apple has touched in years. You
need a really good idea how to deal with the challenges. Personally, I think
it is worth it, but it will be a lot of work (and not of machines, but also of
humans) and very expensive for Apple. I'd wish they would use more of
Openstreetmap and that there would be a benefit for the Openstreetmap
community.

~~~
InclinedPlane
You can get away with releasing a flawed first gen product as long as you are
forging into a new field. Both the iPod and the iPhone had plenty of
competitors, but they were also so massively differentiated from the rest of
the market that they effectively created new product categories (especially
the iPhone).

When you try to compete with an entrenched product that is feature rich and
highly polished (such as google maps) you either need to differentiate your
product or come to the table with an equal level of polish. Apple has failed
to do this. They have made a classic "strategy tax" blunder.

This move is straight out of the playbook of the old, bad Microsoft and the
old, bad IBM. It's the sort of fundamentally bad idea that a big, dumb,
lumbering company makes. If there's anyone in the world that is happy about
this it has to be the people on the surface team at Microsoft. Because it
shows how massively vulnerable Apple is to competition now. Whatever magic
Apple used to have, it seems to be gone.

~~~
corporalagumbo
If you can call selling millions of iPhones in the blink of an eye magic, then
I'd say Apple still has plenty, no?

------
corporalagumbo
I remember reading a while ago about how Apple's reliance on Google for
mapping was a massive problem for the company. Something about how in the
future all ad revenue will derive from location-based recommendations. If
that's true, then there was no other acceptable solution for Apple than to at
some point simply bite the bullet and roll out an in-house mapping service.
Continuing dependence on Google here simply posed too much risk to ad revenue
and indeed the basic integrity of their ecosystem.

All things considered, given how complex maps must be to implement, it seems
like Apple did a pretty good job for day one.

Furthermore, this furore reminds me of the storm over Siri. Tech pundits work
themselves into a frenzy proclaiming that Apple is losing its edge. Average
consumers however pay no heed and the company rolls on to the next product
launch largely unharmed. The critics miss the bigger picture: a company with
so much momentum that it can easily afford to crowdsource the refinement of
challenging big-data projects such as Siri and Maps. While the critics stand
around prophesising doom, Apple iterates, improves, and by the time the next
big hit comes out the last "disaster" is ancient history. Ignore their
strength at your peril I say.

~~~
efuquen
"Something about how in the future all ad revenue will derive from location-
based recommendations"

And why exactly should Apple care about this? Isn't the vast majority of their
profit coming from higher then normal margins on hardware? Their bread and
butter is suppose to be making compelling tech products that have high build
quality and are easy to use for any type of user. Why would Apple care where
ad dollars are going as long as they kept doing what they are suppose to be
doing to justify their high margin devices? Apple isn't in the ad business.

Of course, with their map move they've just compromised the quality of one of
the core services of a mobile device, that should be a bigger deal then any of
this nonsense about location based recommendations being the future of ad
revenue.

~~~
corporalagumbo
From what I understand search and ad revenue is one of Apple's revenue streams
- I have no idea how large nor how to project growth. Just rehashing a vague
memory.

Anyway I think there are plenty of good reasons for Apple to pursue its own
maps solution; eventually all technology will be fully location-gnostic, so it
seems like a pretty critical technology to me. If I were Apple I wouldn't be
happy leaving that in the hands of a malicious competitor either. And when you
have one of the world's largest customer bases to beta-test with... why not?
Seems like pulling a tooth to me - best just to get it over with quickly, and
you're glad once you do.

You call it compromising the quality of a core service, Apple might argue that
effectively unless that service was in-house it was not adequate, so
effectively never existed, and what they've done is get started on building
the service they should have had a while ago.

------
nicholassmith
I'm not sure where the 400 year aspect comes from, but this is probably one of
the best bits of technical writing I've read on the whole iOS6 Maps issues.

------
brudgers
I've come to the conclusion that Apple is willing to bet that mediocrity in
maps is not really a deal breaker in the segment of the mobile electronics
market in which they operate...or rather continued mediocrity will have little
effect on sales.

Nobody, including Google, consistently delivers functional map data to mobile
devices every time, at least not in the Atlanta metro area. I travel there
with some frequency for various soccer tournaments as a referee or parent. It
is not uncommon for one or another device to provide faulty routing to the
people involved in a match. Sometimes it's Garmin. Sometimes it's Android.
sometimes Bing.

People don't primarily buy smartphones for the maps any more than people
primarily buy smartphones based on call quality. Apple knows this. Apple sells
phones because of iTunes and brand positioning.

The issues with maps didn't even garner a comment among the Apple fans in
yesterday's Facebook feed. The edge cases among iPhone users that will be lost
over poor quality maps is more than offset by the Genius's sales pitch about
how easy Apple's map application is to use.

~~~
bmeckel
I don't think that's their thinking actually. I think they knew it would be
near impossible to have a product at launch be as impressive as googles and
they're ok with that. However, by deploying in a mandatory setting with such a
large user base they can catch up to Google quickly. Who knows though, they
may have legitimately overlooked it.

~~~
brudgers
For years, Google has been sending fleets of specially equipped cars down
countless roads in order to help verify their map data. It is impossible to
imagine Apple undertaking such a massive and unsexy project as a first mover,
nevermind as in an effort which would obviously be copying Google.

What has changed as Apple has scaled is that they are willing to weather a PR
storm.

~~~
bmeckel
I don't think street view is what made google that much better than maps. It's
the search that works, and detailed maps, which were around from before street
view. But I do think you're partially right on the apple front, but they do
stuff that pisses people off all the time, the difference is that it's usually
taking out a feature (like Ethernet) that is only beginning to be phased out
by the other tech companies. The big difference is that the maps change
doesn't just bother geeks, but gets at their main user base, which they're
usually pretty careful about.

------
zalew
TIL about Google Map Maker. Just corrected a few issues in my neighborhood,
they got approved, I wonder when they get into Google Maps. Anyone knows how
long it takes? Google's email sent to me just says "Soon you will be able to
see your edit live on Google Maps."

~~~
jeffpalmer
From the FAQ: "How does Reviewing work? Why is my edit still pending/not yet
live on Maps?"

"All new edits need to be reviewed by another mapper. The more you
successfully contribute to Map Maker, the more trust you will gain in the
system and the easier it will be for you to make and review other changes to
the map. If your edit is still pending and not on Google Maps, it has likely
not been reviewed yet. You can post the links to the edits you’ve made on the
review edit requests forum, so that your fellow mappers can review your map
changes, enabling your edit to go live once approved by enough people with
enough trust in Map Maker. Learn more about how reviewing and the moderation
process works here."

~~~
zalew
email #1 "Thank you for helping to improve Google Maps. Once approved, your
contribution will appear on Google Maps for everyone to see. Thanks and happy
mapping! "

email #2 "Congratulations! We have made changes based on your suggestion on
Map Maker. Soon you will be able to see your edit live on Google Maps. Thank
you for your contribution to Google Map Maker, and happy mapping! "

it's got status 'published'. is it pending some another review? I've read the
faq and learn more, but still have no clue, the terminology is vague and a
post from 2010 on a discussion group says 4-6 months to live.

~~~
tonfa
From my previous edits, I think it's in the order of weeks.

~~~
iaskwhy
Two to three weeks on my unique attempt since I reported it. Maybe because it
was a major location, in Westminster there was an Iceland store showing on top
of Parliament Square.

------
stcredzero
_> Perhaps the most egregious error is that Apple’s team relied on quality
control by algorithm and not a process partially vetted by informed human
analysis. You cannot read about the errors in Apple Maps without realizing
that these maps were being visually examined and used for the first time by
Apple’s customers and not by Apple’s QC teams_

Reminds me of the days when Microsoft used to release software that customers
would call "beta-quality" and wonder if they were being used as unpaid QA.

------
btilly
Articles like this make me suspect that
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517> was an extremely accurate
description of Apple's problems.

I wonder how long it will take for the outside world's expectations of Apple
to drop to what they should be in the permanent absence of _the gaze of Barad-
dûr_?

------
cageface
Where was Apple's QA on this? This seems like a colossal oversight for a
company previously known for sweating all the small details.

~~~
sabret00the
QA on the scale of what they needed wouldn't work. You have to bare in mind
that Apple like to keep things close to their chest. To have at least one
person per city testing this worldwide was impossible.

~~~
spinchange
For the most valuable company on earth, with more cash reserves in the bank
than the entire value of most companies? Google has street view cars roaming
the planet. I think Apple could do more human QA if it was a priority.

~~~
blrgeek
> I think Apple could do more human QA if it was a priority.

Only if they realized it. It took Google 3 years to realize that they couldn't
solve it algorithmically.

~~~
zem
if you and i know that google tried for three years and then realised humans
were needed, why would you think the people over at apple do not?

------
robomartin
The real question is: How many Apple users or would-be Apple users consider
mapping to be critically important?

This could be a very interesting case study on sales of an otherwise great
product being hurt by a move that cripples a critically important element of
said product.

I've already met several people with iPhone 4's (or older) who said they are
not upgrading to either iOS6 or iPhone 5 because of the mapping issue. I am
part of that group as well. I'll have to buy an iPhone 5 for development
purposes but I don't think I'll have it as my primary phone until the whole
maps business is sorted out.

Mapping seems to be one of those things that you can't design your way around.
In other words, nobody cares about beautiful inaccurate maps. This could be
one of the first challenges on Apples's desk that can't be solved with cute
commercials and pretty design. It has to be good and at least equal to, if not
better than, Google's offering.

Regrettably sometimes the only way to get good at something is to start doing
it. At first you'll probably suck at it but, with time and effort, you'll get
better and better. This is Apple getting on that path to excelling at mapping.
It'll take time. There's no doubt that they have the financial resources to
make it happen. Now it is about execution.

------
jsz0
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Apple's Maps. It doesn't excuse the
pain it will cause users in the short term but I don't see anything that is
going to be a long term problem for Apple. It's now just a process of fixing
errors, stocking more POI information, and working with their partners/sources
to continue improving the platform. There was never going to be a point where
they could make this switch gracefully.

------
pohl
Excellent post, full of valuable insight.

 _Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google
was able to do when it started its mapping project._

Does anybody know what this means? Don't the queries I make go through their
servers, and isn't my location a relevant parameter for those queries? I don't
see why this can't be mined.

~~~
fpgeek
I think what it means is that Google had lots of queries of the form: <thing>
(e.g. "restaurant") <location> (e.g "Times Square") that came in through the
search engine "front door".

Having a lot of relevant questions (and hard data on which answers to those
questions were used) is an invaluable resource in bootstrapping mapping and
local search together.

------
lekanwang
There was an amazing blog post (<http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-
maps-label-read...>) on 41Latitude when it still around about the absolute
thing of beauty and art that is the labeling and visual design of Google Maps
that enable it to have extremely high data density, while maintaining perhaps
the best readability of any of the interactive maps out there. Correctness is
the most glaring issue, but it's far, far more that sets Google apart from
what Apple launched in their maps application.

EDIT: Here is an archived version found elsewhere:
[http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-
am...](http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-amp-Label-
Readability-Part-3)

------
DanBC
> I suspect that Apple does not yet understand what a headache it will be to
> integrate the information from these three disparate sources.

This is ridiculous in the year 2012. Nothing about this should be a headache
(apart from people keeping their data secret for various reasons) yet it's
still bafflingly hard.

~~~
sethg
I’ve been hip-deep in this kind of thing for years, and it really is hard.

Suppose that data source A has a point for “Logan Airport” and data source B
has a point (a few hundred feet away) for “General Edward Lawrence Logan
International Airport” and data source C has a separate data point for every
terminal.... on a case-by-case basis it’s not hard to resolve questions like
this, but when you try to come up with an algorithm that scales to tens of
millions of map features, you spend a lot of time scratching your head saying
“why did it do THAT?!?!”

------
snuze
I used turn-by-turn directions yesterday and everything worked fine. I think
people are blowing the whole thing way out of proportion. If Google Maps was
so great, why did Google never add turn-by-turn directions to the iOS app? My
guess is that they were simply holding it over Apple.

~~~
camiller
Most of the complaints I've seen had nothing to do with turn by turn
navigation. It is more about where points of interest are on the maps,
airports in the wrong place etc.

------
6ren
> [if you follow] Google’s attempts at developing a quality mapping service,
> you will notice that they initially tried to automate the entire process and
> failed miserably, as Apple has.

And they can improve, as Google did. But customers are very forgiving of
mistakes and iteration when your product is the first and best (so far); plus,
Apple's key branding is quality.

> Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google
> was able to do when it started its mapping project

This is an interesting competitive advantage Google has that is really really
hard to beat. Similar to what Facebook has. But... perhaps Apple also has
data? e.g. from Siri queries? They can certainly gather it now, now that their
mapping app is being used.

------
davestheraves
It always surprises me how a company which prides itself on UX, and having
reinvented UX can repeatedly screw it up big time with core things, maps,
email (MobileMe when that was launched).

I just wonder why fix something that ain't broke and make it worse!

------
jpswade
The headline doesn't seem to come up in the article at all.

~~~
john-n
As I mentioned above, I believe he's referring to the 400 year history of map
making which Apple appears to have ignored, in part at least.

------
sabret00the
My biggest disappointment regarding this whole matter is that as a result, OSM
is getting a lot of negative criticism. More-so than Tom-Tom.

~~~
lispm
But why? OSM is not really used by Apple in the current map app, AFAIK.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
I assume, like Yahoo/Flickr used OSM in places like Beijing and Bagdad, that
Apple only uses OSM to fill in the gaps were their commercial sources are weak
and, to be frank, where it only needs to be better than nothing.

------
emehrkay
Maps is the only example that I can think of when compared head to head,
Google makes better software. I hope people will continue to complain because
it will force apple to get their shit together and put out a better product.
Myapple maps experience is north compared with my Google maps , however, I
haven't had any notable issues with apple amps in the Baltimore area.

~~~
netcan
What about search?

~~~
gurkendoktor
Apple has no web search so it can't be compared - I guess.

------
ed_blackburn
The suggestion to acquire TomTom is certainly bold and thought provoking. If
you live in a city like London maps is essential and a core feature for
phones.

Google must be pissing themselves laughing. Just as Apple get their act
together google will probably wade in with a killer app? OR will they? Perhaps
they'll not bother and use it as a marketing ploy to push Android?

Fascinating article.

------
shanecleveland
For all the problems there may be with Apple's maps, the directions to my
house have actually improved. Google maps has recognizes a road that has been
closed for about 15 years as still open, and it uses the closed road for most
requesting directions to my house (and probably anyone else in my vicinity).
Apple maps got it right.

------
metatronscube
I think Apple should look to hire someone like this to help draw together the
various problems with their maps app (However for a first attempt I think its
fine). Its not insurmountable problem, and given what Apple is capable of, its
something they can make better with a bit of effort.

------
terminus
> You cannot read about the errors in Apple Maps without realizing that these
> maps were being visually examined and used for the first time by Apple’s
> customers and not by Apple’s QC teams.

Wasn't iOS6 in public beta for a few months?

~~~
cbs
Public beta is apple's customers, not a QA team.

------
jamesrcole
In bigger-picture terms, Apple doing their own maps is surely a good thing
because of the competition it creates.

Surely it's going to end up pushing improvements in maps technology.

------
tsycho
This is probably the first time (IMHO) when the "title-change by mods" made
complete sense. The old "400 years" title was pure link-bait.

------
stevewilhelm
One solution: Apple acquires Yahoo and Nokia, or at least the Yahoo search and
Nokia map teams.

------
josh33
This smells like a resume to apple from someone wanting to be hired. I can't
fault that, but using link bait initially to score high on HN, getting on
Apple's radar makes me feel used.

------
zoowar
Street View QED

------
bloggez
And Apple is even less happy to deal with an Army than Google was.

