

The Blame Game - superchink
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/12/14/blame-game

======
MatthewPhillips
> (This I’ve heard from numerous sources, from both sides of the
> negotiations.)

Nope, doesn't work that way. You can't be both an opinion blog and a
journalist. While DF probably does have insider sources most do not, he
doesn't have journalistic integrity and can't ask his readers to take his word
on something being true that confirms his own bias.

~~~
drewcrawford
> he doesn't have journalistic integrity

Can you provide any examples of Gruber blatantly lying or misrepresenting his
sources? (Serious question)

~~~
bitcartel
Regarding integrity, check his iPhone 5 review. Is there any mention of the
Apple Maps app being a farce?

Regarding inside sources, are there any examples of him breaking an exclusive
story of substance? For example, what is happening to the (new) Mac Pro?

~~~
cwe
Why would Apple Maps have anything to do with a review of new hardware? Just
over a week later, though, he did write at length about the maps situation
[1]. How does this show a lack of integrity?

[1]
[http://daringfireball.net/2012/09/timing_of_apples_map_switc...](http://daringfireball.net/2012/09/timing_of_apples_map_switch)

~~~
bitcartel
iOS 6.0 shipped with the iPhone 5 and Apple Maps was a major new feature
touted by Apple and presented in-person to journalists.

------
CoffeeDregs
[TFA is basically content-free, but ...]

This is the don't-make-your-company-dependent-upon-one-service thing we see
happening around Twitter, but writ much larger. That's not too interesting or
too hard to see.

What I hadn't considered before is that the situation is somewhat a natural
outcome of Apple's have strategy of limited-set-of-apps-for-core-
functionality. If Apple has fostered/encouraged multiple great mapping
applications rather than promoting just one this situation might not have
occurred. Of course, then they'd have multiple mapping apps and users might be
confused.

I understand that maps are valuable to mobile devices, but I don't think
they're _core_ to mobile devices. Apple treated them as core and didn't seem
to have planned well for serious changes to maps.

~~~
malandrew
Maps absolutely are core to mobile devices. Besides communication, mapping is
the other primary use case of my mobile device and I know I'm not alone on
this one.

Communication, mapping and calendaring are also the three primary "intents"
built into the device since day one. For example, every "maps.google.com" link
from any application is captured by the OS and routed to the native maps app
instead of Safari.

~~~
CoffeeDregs
By core, I mean that it's critical to have control of them for
success/viability of the device (ie. strategic components). I certainly do
think that maps are important, but I don't think it would matter which mapping
application is used on a device or think that it's critical for Apple to
control that application. The UI, settings, notifications, phone app, SMS app
[maybe], location services seem like just about the only core bits. Treating a
giant, very complicated application built by another company as core means
that you're probably signing up to build that functionality in the future. As
Apple is doing...

In hindsight, I suspect Apple would have been happier had they launched with
Google Maps, then had gotten Garmin, MapQuest, Bing Maps, Yahoo Maps, etc to
build great mapping applications. I don't know how building a mapping
infrastructure is a good idea for Apple [but perhaps I just haven't thought
about it enough yet].

~~~
jessaustin
If these other players could "build great mapping applications", I suspect
some of them would have by now. Google really is in a class by itself here.

------
nextstep
Does Apple really protect its users' privacy more than Google?

~~~
brianpan
I think it's accurate to say that their business interests are different, and
thus the applications to privacy are different. For example, Safari defaults
to "Block cookies from third parties and advertisers". Chrome defaults to
allow all cookies by default.

~~~
hullo
Not to mention that Google ad servers actively worked to undermine Safari's
3rd party cookie blocking default.

[http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/02/16/how-google-tracked-
sa...](http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/02/16/how-google-tracked-safari-
users/)

I'm not personally terribly concerned about browser tracking and take no steps
to block it (I work for an advertising supported business and on the whole
would rather have targeted ads than not), but it is completely fair to say
that Apple does more to protect privacy (as it's commonly understood online)
than Google.

------
kjackson2012
I mentioned in a previous comment that I think Apple should just bite the
bullet and license Google Maps in perpetuity, in order to preserve the best
experience for its users. Let Apple get access to the data that Google
acquires via Maps, let Google take all the ad revenues, and fully integrate
with Google, and pay them some amount one-time money... maybe $10B? $10B
represents 3 months of their free cash flow in a year.

It would be the equivalent of Apple making a deal with Microsoft back in 97/98
that allowed them to stop their distracting fight against Microsoft and
concentrate on making themselves better.

This whole Maps fiasco is a complete distraction to the iPhone, and it's not
something that Apple is good at. They are amazing at hardware innovation. This
is where their core competency is. Case in point, despite all the negative
talk about how the iPhone 5 wasn't innovative, their latest iMacs are
amazingly beautiful and futuristic-looking still.

Their software is okay at best, but not innovative. Their web services
offerings are below average, at best.

There is no point in getting into a protracted ground war vs Google when it
comes to Maps because it's a distraction and they won't be able to overtake
Google. Companies like Yahoo that had way more resources than Apple when it
comes to search have tried and essentially gave up. If Yahoo can't do it, how
can Apple do it, where hardware wags the tail on their software? Better to
keep focusing on maintaining/retaking the hardware innovation mindshare and
lead.

~~~
arrrg
Why should Apple do that?

You know what would be the much cheaper solution? Allow iOS users to set
default apps (for maps and even other stuff). Problem solved. Google and Apple
don’t even have to meet for that, agree on anything or pay anything.

~~~
stanleydrew
Well there is an engineering cost to defining and implementing the interfaces
that would make setting "default apps" work. Still probably cheaper and
definitely better for users in the long run.

~~~
mikeash
That cost is really low. Not even worth mentioning. It's a bit of UI in
settings, and you're done. It already exists on the Mac and has for ages. We
can be stupendously pessimistic about the time and say it would require ten
man-years to implement (not likely) and it's still vastly cheaper than
licensing just about anything at their scale.

------
debacle
The need to _always_ assign blame to an entity for some suboptimal experience
is immature. It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of business and
economics.

Some things just are.

------
mikeash
> I’d say neither company was being a "jerk" here. Apple and Google were both
> acting in their own interests.

If this wasn't blindingly obvious to you from the very moment this whole
business showed up in public, then you should take some time to reconsider how
you analyze the world.

~~~
FireBeyond
True, true. But the additional claims from Gruber in this is that "both acting
in their own interests, Google's being 'milk you dry for information and
revenue', while apparently Apple is this beatific entity, whose interest is
'sincerely caring for ... their customers'." Eye roll

~~~
hcarvalhoalves
It's more that for Apple, users are customers (they buy the gadget), while for
Google, users are the product being sold (ads).

~~~
runamok
Apple is just as interested as locking you into their world (itunes, app
store, icloud, etc.) as google is. And apple gets I believe 30% of the ads
you're shown within their ecosystem so you are the customer AND the product.

------
laureny
> For one thing, Apple sincerely values the privacy of its users more than
> Google does.

Ah, Gruber... so cute.

------
yanw
It's annoying when people with some degree of influence casually spew
misinformed nonsense:

 _Google wanting iOS users to be able to sign in — if not be downright
encouraged to sign in — to their Google account, that’s easy to understand.
That’s how Google makes money, by selling ads that target us based on the
information they collect as we use their services._

You agree to send anonymous data to Google for the location targeting and
improved accuracy bit, you sign-in to sync bookmarks and search history. Also
one wouldn't have needed to sign into every Google app separately if iOS
allowed Google the same OS-wide account integration that Facebook and Twitter
have.

~~~
voxmatt
I legitimately think I've misunderstood your comment, because I'm not
following. As I understand it, the anonymous data collection allows Google to
improve the maps, gather aggregate user data, etc., but is "anonymous." If you
sign into a Google account, then they can track individual usage and better
target ads. There's nothing particularly nefarious about this; Google does
this with all their services, that's their business. Right?

~~~
yanw
Location data is anonymous regardless if you login afterward or not:
[http://support.google.com/gmm/bin/answer.py?hl=en-
GB&top...](http://support.google.com/gmm/bin/answer.py?hl=en-
GB&topic=1617283&hlrm=nl&ctx=topic&answer=81874)

~~~
cube13
Searches, starred locations, etc. are not, though. Arguably, those are more
important than location data.

~~~
yanw
Yes, but they are also not as sensitive as location data and are very useful
features.

~~~
josephlord
Who says that they aren't as sensitive? Where I am going to can be just a
sensitive as where I am and where I might be thinking about going could be
even more sensitive.

The feature may be useful and I'm not saying that it shouldn't be offered but
I believe that your assertion that they aren't as sensitive is NOT universally
true.

------
stephengillie
So Google and Apple are fighting, and iPhone users got caught in the middle
without their maps data.

