Google Outs 3D Maps For iOS Ahead of Apple 197
hypnosec writes "Apple announced during WWDC 2012 that it is going to ditch Google maps and bring out its own under iOS 6. So, Google started working and in fact raced ahead of Apple in providing 3D maps for iOS. Through a blog post, Google announced that it has now made 3D imagery available on its Google Earth for iOS app. Users of iPhone 4S, iPad 2 or new iPad, while using Google Earth for iOS app, will feel that they are virtually flying over cities.The feature, as of now, works only for 12 regions. Cities for which the 3D imagery is provided are from US with an expectation of a city in Rome. The U.S. cities include: Boulder, Colo., Boston, Charlotte, N.C., Lawrence, Kan., Long Beach, Calif., Los Angeles, Portland, Ore., San Diego, Santa Cruz, Calif., Tampa, Fla., Tucson, Ariz., and San Francisco, plus its East Bay and Peninsula neighbors, notes the blog post."
Do I need a geography lesson that bad? (Score:5, Funny)
How many cities does Rome have???
Re:Do I need a geography lesson that bad? (Score:5, Informative)
It contains itself, as well as Vatacan City, so 2?
And before anyone starts (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
London also has 2: the City of London and the City of Westminster.
Wouldn't there be 3: Greater London, the City of London (the Square Mile), and the City of Westminster?
recursive problems (Score:2)
it's it problematic to define a city as containing itself? It's Rome...all the way down.
Not quite... (Score:2)
...and San Francisco, plus its East Bay and Peninsula neighbors...
Not to be nitpicky, but I happen to live in Berkeley (clearly east bay neighbor) and after trying the app on my iPhone I can tell you there's no 3D here.
Fanboy Article? (Score:4, Interesting)
Devil's Advocate (Score:2)
Wouldn't the current state of Google's 3D work be about right for someone who started working out it about the same time Apple acquired C3?
Frankly I don't know why there is this level of fuss about 3D maps. The 3D maps are cool, but they are a nice add-on but traditional maps serve people far better day to day... for Apple they are more vital as they make for a somewhat viable replacement for Street View. But Google already has street view (and now that Street View backpack to go where many have gone befo
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that 3D maps are over hyped.
Re: (Score:2)
iOS6 runs (albiet with some missing features) on 3GS which is a 3 year old phone. That's a better upgrade path than what most other mobile phone manufacturers offer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
iOS6 on a 2G or 3G?!
Goodness, what are you smoking? It would be unusable! Although, if they were going for the Android user experience maybe it's a great idea!
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS A JOKE (not even a very good one).
In short, you have no idea what you're talking about. iOS6 won't run "just fine" on the original iPhone, or even the 3G. The earliest phone it supports is the 3GS, and even then it's going to be missing one or two of the more resource-hungry features.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Great Enhancement to their Ad Platform (Score:1)
Now with 3D Ad's!
Re: (Score:2)
expectation of a city in Rome (Score:3)
Not on iPhone 4? (Score:2)
I guess now I have a reason to buy a newer iPhone if this only works on the 4S and not the 4 I have. Thanks, Google!
Kansas? (Score:2)
Isn't Kansas flat?
Re: (Score:2)
Lawrence has some very hilly areas. Its really pretty to take off from Lawrence airport, head east, then south, then west along 15th Street . There's some lovely rolling hills.
Kansas in general is surprisingly hilly. As another poster said, the Flint Hills are spectacular. Even in eastern Kansas and KC itself you'll see a lot of hills. There's even cave systems excavated in the hills for business and storage.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends how you define flat.
Yeah, it's flat for non-desert land. That means some minor hills. If you've ever been to Iowa, imagine that with the hills about 1/3rd as high. That's why most people call it flat. It is more hilly than the Texas panhandle, but geometric planes have more hills than the Texas panhandle.
It's not flat compared to, say, the ocean on a calm day. That's why most Kansans insist it's not flat.
Oh, and the Flint Hills? Yeah, it's a ridge of hills that runs through the state. You'd b
The new iPad.... (Score:5, Funny)
SAY IT! I WANT TO HEAR YOU SAY IT!
No more of this "the new" crap.
Re: (Score:3)
..is the iPad 3.
SAY IT! I WANT TO HEAR YOU SAY IT!
No more of this "the new" crap.
Officially it is "iPad (3rd Generation)" in technical specs, but for marketing reasons it's The New iPad until they release a newer one.
Thermonuclear (Score:2)
How's that thermonuclear thing working out for you now, Steve?
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by how lawsuits go so far, pretty good, actually.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see Apple's profits wilting. By it's inconsequential, really, since going thermonuclear implies bringing down the other guy no matter what. It tends to be bad for everyone's business. The trick is to survive longest.
whether Apple can do it, we shall see. I wish them to fail, but so far they are having the upper hand in the fight.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's profits have wilted? In what universe?
Either way, thermonuclear destruction "at all costs" (according to Steve's original vent) doesn't require that you're profitable, just that the other guy is gone.
Apple didn't hit the expectations that the analysts were guessing at in this quarter, but that doesn't mean they're wilting - sales are up, and strong in all segments except for the much-aged iPod. Their PC business is growing in a stagnant industry overall (and their new retina MBP still has a two week
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta earn that pay, right bonch?
Yawn. Try a new trolling method kid. Not bonch, never been bonch, never been paid to post on slashdot. You also forgot to log in. Maybe you left your slashdot password with all that evidence you also forgot to present.
Re: (Score:2)
Brief review (Score:2)
I finally had time to load it up and check it out on my phone this morning. Initial findings:
1) It is pretty freaking amazing.
2) The gestures for navigation are perfect.
3) It is awesome and makes me want a tablet.
4) I hope they figure out a way to make trees not look like round-topped posts.
5) Lucky for me, I'm happy to look at SF all day. They did a good job on the sunken plaza at the Powell Street BART station, but I wish they would have been able to perfectly render the sculpture at Justin Herman Plaza (
'A city in Rome'? (Score:2)
Google Maps on iPad still behind (Score:2)
Yet Google Maps on iPad doesn't even have a distance measure, nor support offline map fragments (even as uselessly as Android). It also doesn't look vector-based yet, it's still tile-based. Google really have some catching up to do, and shouldn't be focusing just on minority new features for Google Earth.
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:5, Insightful)
They control their destiny.
Apple dictates what apps can and can't be installed on your phone. If you're an iOS user, they control yours.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple dictates what apps can and can't be installed on your phone, but they don't control it. Jailbreak to install whatever you want and they've never removed an installed app from a device. They do control what's in the App Store but that isn't part of the discussion.
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow, you were so happy with Apple not providing you with turn-by-turn navigation? And now with iOS 6, you suddenly are really happy that you get turn-by-turn navigation. Talk about fanbois.
And yes, it was Apple that did not provide you turn-by-turn navigation. Apple licensed Google Maps data, and build their own app to provide Google Maps services, and for some reason did not think navigation was important enough (until now of course).
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:5, Informative)
And yes, it was Apple that did not provide you turn-by-turn navigation.
Google did not allow Apple's maps to include turn-by-turn navigation, their license forbade it.
That's fair enough — Google dictates the terms of use for their data. But Apple had to build their own system to get around this restriction (or license from elsewhere).
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you were so happy with Apple not providing you with turn-by-turn navigation? And now with iOS 6, you suddenly are really happy that you get turn-by-turn navigation.
I used the free Waze app on iOS before. I have the iOS 6 beta on my dev phone and it's better in some ways but not as good as Waze in others. Waze was nice in that you could log on to their map editor and fix the roads around your neighborhood. They were, however, not very good at actual directions to obscure places, and unless you did sign onto their site your neighborhood's streets were probably a mess in their DB. I'm sure Apple will not only do better, but contribute back like they tend to do to all
Re: (Score:2)
I thought Google used Navteq [navteq.com] data, like most of the players in the industry. Ie the map data that still shows the new Tollways where I live a good 100 meters to the left, and warns me about drowning in the pond I'm "driving through."
Re: (Score:3)
Actually there was power play between Google and Apple. Google ultimately wanted Apple to allow their own app, which Apple did not want too. And Apple wanted Google to license everything they had on Google Maps, which they refused and agreed only to give a taste of Google Maps.
Google held usability ransom, to gain more control into iPhone, and Apple sacrificed usability to retain control. Both are equally evil in this case.
And about OSM, I could give a shit about who uses OSM, unless they co
Re: (Score:3)
Google held usability ransom, to gain more control into iPhone, and Apple sacrificed usability to retain control. Both are equally evil in this case.
Why do you think Apple sacrificed usability? The fact is they did not switch to their own mapping data until they could offer something more usable.
Not agreeing to terms that would make the maps worse for users (like larger and more prominent logos that EVERY app developer has to rev an app to make sure they are not hiding) is not "sacrificing usability".
I don
Re: (Score:2)
Google held usability ransom, to gain more control into iPhone, and Apple sacrificed usability to retain control. Both are equally evil in this case.
Why do you think Apple sacrificed usability? The fact is they did not switch to their own mapping data until they could offer something more usable.
Not agreeing to terms that would make the maps worse for users (like larger and more prominent logos that EVERY app developer has to rev an app to make sure they are not hiding) is not "sacrificing usability".
I guess it depends on whether you find navigation useful. If you did, then apple did sacrifice usability. If you did not, neither Apple nor Google did anything that affects you. So neither is evil.
I dont see Apple contribute to OSM so far
Why would they not want the data they are presenting to be more accurate? If Apple is using that data they will help improve it.
How should I know? Why are they not contributing to OSM again?
Re: (Score:3)
How the fuck would you know whether Apple is contributing to OSM? And what exactly would they contribute? The address and coordinates for Apple HQ? Apple isn't a mapping company.
And no company in the world is "evil" for not giving you some feature in an app or any other product. To even bring up the idea shows you're a pretentious twit. I hope your turn-by-turn directions lead you off a nice cliff.
Re: (Score:2)
Er, because it would widely publicized. Apple has good PR personnel who usually make sure it is widely publicized that Apple is contributing to OSM. The simplest is to throw money at them, to help them run servers. They could also share their routing algorithm, and the code that uses OSM maps.
Well if they are trying to push Android and cripple iPhone, to me, they are evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you prove this? So far we've been dealing with facts -- ypu are presenting the thread with specula
Re: (Score:2)
You can always set a price dear enough for something that in PRACTICAL terms it cannot be licensed. That is what Google chose to do instead of working with Apple on reasonable terms and doing something best for the users.
Regardless of terms though the fact Apple had to ever think about terms is why they wanted to move away from Google, so there was no worry that in the future terms might get even worse.
This is when Google stopped being Google IMO.
Re: (Score:2)
Care to share the facts, so that I can dodge them on the way out?
Re: (Score:2)
A fact i am very happy with...
Re: (Score:2)
I am happy to leave my security up to someone else. I have better things to do and my phone has a almost direct line to my bank account so it needs to be secure.
Life is really to short to have to spend hours keeping tabs on whats what in the latest phone security.
I also let antivirus companies handle my security on my computer.
Re: (Score:1)
You do realize I hope that it is an unfair game? Apple can kick google and its apps out of its fenced garden any time it wants.
Like the spoiled kid who does not like to loose.
Re: (Score:2)
When I was young I didn't like too loose. Now I take what I can get.
Re: (Score:2)
Some kids just like to tight.
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:4, Interesting)
You do know that Apple is the author of the IOS maps app? They just use google data. If Apple wanted to make a maps app similar to the one on android that uses vector graphics and so on, they could have, but they didn't. Blame them. Google couldn't have written an improved maps app, because it would have been rejected as being too similar to the IOS app. Google was in a no win situation.
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:5, Informative)
In Apple's defense, from Google Maps' Terms of Use [google.com]:
So the question is, did Apple try to get prior written authorization and Google declined their request? Or did they just say, "We'll get our map data from somewhere else because we don't like Google anymore."
In Google's defense, they license some of their data from elsewhere and they may be restricted as to what they can allow others to do. For example, looking at Japan [google.com], down in the lower right of the screen we see "Map Data © 2012 Google, ZENRIN" Zenrin [zenrin.co.jp] is a company that Google uses, I assume, for some Japanese map data. They can use the data for their purposes, but they cannot sublicense that data for other purposes. If Apple wanted to use that data the same way as Google via Google's Maps API, they'd have to also license the data from Zenrin.
A quick jaunt around the world will show you that Google has licensed map data from lots of different companies: GeoBasis, TeleAtlas, AfriGIS, MapLink, Mapcity, Inav/Geosistemas, INEGI, and I'm sure some others I have missed. Apple could run around and try to sign similar licenses with all those companies to use Google's map data, or they could just find someone else.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe Google preferred to retain that feature as a competitive advantage [...]
It fits in nicely with the whole "Google versus Apple" battle, but I don't see it. Why would Google not want iOS to use Google maps? They want everybody to use Google maps. I can't believe that Google would do that.
That said, I could certainly believe that Google went around and tried to renegotiate and basically got told, "Yeah, sure, for (giant sum of money)," which they then tried to pass on to Apple. Apple said, "We can find someone to do it cheaper--your loss."
Re: (Score:3)
Google has been dragging their feet at adding iOS apps for their own services. For example, there's still no iOS GTalk app, not even with chat - forget about voice/video. GMail app took, what, five years? and it's still pretty crappy at that. Google+ app still had no iPad version last I checked.
So, no. They don't seem to be all that eager to have their services run on iOS, at least as apps. I guess that's because they prefer you to use their web apps when possible, but they are decidedly second-rate citizen
Re: (Score:3)
"[Google] is believed to have angered Apple leaders by withholding the Street View and turn-by-turn navigation features. Its demands were for better branding within the app and incorporation of its Latitude service, which Apple was unwilling to integrate." (WSJ)
Sounds like Apple wanted to just buy the data and do their own thing with it. Google wanted an inside track. Apple refused. Doesn't really sound like either company was doing anything other than what would serve them best.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't believe everything you read.
"[Google] is believed to have angered Apple leaders by withholding the Street View [...]"
My iPhone 4S supports Street View in the default Maps application. Sounds like the only person who "believed" it was the writer.
Like I said, it makes a good story. Corporate intrigue, behemoths jockeying for position, etc. The truth is usually far more boring.
Re: (Score:2)
How recently? The Waze app has been available for ages, and it doesn't even use Google's maps.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, Apple could not get terms they wanted for things like vector maps, or more importantly to allow turn by turn directions.
Now that Apple is free of the Google Mapping Data Tyrant, any app that wishes can create and display turn-by-turn directions - and in fact there's a specific mapping app store that encourages this.
Google is not nearly so free on Android. They want you using Google Maps always.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As soon as Apple puts its own Maps app up, I wouldn't be surprised to see "duplicate functionality" apps get axed from the store.
You know, the usual Apple MO.
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as Apple puts its own Maps app up, I wouldn't be surprised to see "duplicate functionality" apps get axed from the store.
You know, the usual Apple MO.
Wasn't that basically the Microsoft MO, except instead of banning competitors they would cut of their air supply and bankrupt them?
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:4, Informative)
As I understand it the iOS Maps app was neglected by Apple, not Google.
It seems likely that Apple always intended to replace the backend service with their own and one might argue that "neglecting" the app was a good move in that regard. By keeping their users (which includes me) on technology that is probably 5+ years old it gives them a chance of replacing it without users complaining too much about feature regression.
Google's move hardly "reeks of desperation". Since when has Google done anything other than try and offer the best experience they can on any device?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"Since when has Google done anything other than try and offer the best experience they can on any device?"
That's a joke, right?
Re:Google trying to save face, except it won't wor (Score:4, Informative)
No, Google just care about eyeballs and will work to get them.
They will write Exchange plugins to work with Gmail.
They will buy Exchange related technology to get Gmail to work 'properly' with iOS mail.
They will do what it takes to get a user, whatever platform the user may be on (for reasonably popular platforms of course).
Re: (Score:2)
You may want to look into how long it took for Apple to approve the Google Voice app.
Re: (Score:2)
On my iPhone I have the "Google" app, Google Authenticator, Google Translate and Chrome. I could also have a Google+ app, a GMail app, Google Earth, Google Latitude and Google Books. (I personally can't get Google Voice because it isn't available in the Australian iTunes store).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Google was able to provide turn-by-turn directions for years (and did for Android). Rumor has it that Apple wouldn't let them release it for iOS even though Google offered to do it for free. Speculation at the time was that Apple didn't want maps to be too good so that when Apple released its own maps later it'd seem like an upgrade. That seems to be exactly how it played out.
Re: (Score:2)
Google was able to provide turn-by-turn directions for years (and did for Android). Rumor has it that Apple wouldn't let them release it for iOS even though Google offered to do it for free. Speculation at the time was that Apple didn't want maps to be too good so that when Apple released its own maps later it'd seem like an upgrade. That seems to be exactly how it played out.
Cool story bro.
How did this get +2 interesting?
It's well known via many publicly accessible sources that Google's terms didn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (or any other third party app service) without prior consent of Google.
By "rumour has it" you really mean "my predetermined bias towards Google and against Apple means that I'll just make a wild assed guess that paints Google as a the good guy" right?
In reality, Apple negotiated for the right to include turn-by-turn, but they couldn't agree to Google's term
Re: (Score:3)
Out of curiosity, you haven't posted since 2008, you come back just to shill/troll for apple?
Re: (Score:2)
just their way of trying to save face right before Apple kicks them off from the iPhone main screen
I can see it now: instead of "Android is better because it has Flash" it will be "Android is better because it has Google".
Re: (Score:2)
Apple itself reduced estimates for its next quarter (ie, they are not releasing iPhone 5 anytime soon)
(Whiny Fanboi Voice) Yeah, but, but, when Apple releases the iPhone 5, they'll bury Samsung! And if they don't, it'll only be because they just can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand! You'll see!
Re: (Score:2)
Apple itself reduced estimates for its next quarter (ie, they are not releasing iPhone 5 anytime soon)
(Whiny Fanboi Voice) Yeah, but, but, when Apple releases the iPhone 5, they'll bury Samsung! And if they don't, it'll only be because they just can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand! You'll see!
Well for me, the iPhone 5 roll out is the mostly breathlessly anticipated Apple offering ever, because I'm looking forward to the epic fail. And Apple spinmods, before you reach for that button, know that I do not hate Apple. Per se. I hate evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Please define evil. By my standard, you must not be in love with Google either.
Re: (Score:2)
Did Google kick in the door of a journalist yet? Did Google "suicide" a factory worker who lost a phone prototype? Did Google try to strongarm an environmental organization? Did Larry park in the disabled spot?
Re: (Score:2)
You did good in listing Apple's evil actions as reported by the press. Now can you do the same for Google?
Re: (Score:2)
You did good in listing Apple's evil actions as reported by the press. Now can you do the same for Google?
That's an attempt at false equivalence.
Re: (Score:2)
Google aren't saints you know
Sky Hook
Net neutrality - Verizon
By passing user privacy settings in Safari and IE
$500 million fine for illegal prescription drug imports ads
and many more
Re: (Score:2)
Did Google kick in the door of a journalist yet? Did Google "suicide" a factory worker who lost a phone prototype? Did Google try to strongarm an environmental organization? Did Larry park in the disabled spot?
Probably not; those are very specific criteria for evil.
Did Apple deliberately go against user settings to set third party advertising and tracking cookies on computers by exploiting a browser bug?
And you're seriously blaming Apple for the alleged murder of a third party factory employee (I assume that's what you're implying - that Apple paid to have a worker killed, or had someone in-house go and do it) due to a lost prototype? What reality do you live in?
I also wasn't aware that Apple personally employed
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not; those are very specific criteria for evil.
I am pretty certain those were examples. You can dismiss any example (used to establish a pattern) by claiming that particular example is used as too odd a criterion. Of course, when you do that, you can't claim objectivity.
I also wasn't aware that Apple personally employed the police department responsible for investigating a criminal act involving Gizmodo and the purchase of stolen property. Good to know. How are they managing to keep it funded and yet still remain enormously profitable?
Even you yourself don't believe this argument.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not; those are very specific criteria for evil.
I am pretty certain those were examples. You can dismiss any example (used to establish a pattern) by claiming that particular example is used as too odd a criterion. Of course, when you do that, you can't claim objectivity.
I also wasn't aware that Apple personally employed the police department responsible for investigating a criminal act involving Gizmodo and the purchase of stolen property. Good to know. How are they managing to keep it funded and yet still remain enormously profitable?
Even you yourself don't believe this argument.
No, I clearly don't because it's not an argument; it's hyperbole in response to the GP's hyperbole that Apple are "evil" for "kicking down the door of a journalist". Unless Apple are direct employers of the police department that went to investigate that offence then Apple did no such thing. It reported the theft/loss of property like any other company and the police in the appropriate jurisdiction carried out their job and investigated the crime. It was pretty easy for them, given that Gizmodo didn't exact
Re: (Score:2)
Between all of the locked bootloaders, lackluster Nexi offering, buggy outdated software, draconian carrier restrictions, etc. The love is gone.
Android was fun from the G1 up until the Driod X with eFuse. From that point forward it has become apparent that Android and every major player behind it is trying its best to be like Apple, but not in the way that matters.
It is sad really. I love Android and the idea of it, but it is being savagely raped by those that created it and profess love for it, much the sa
Re: (Score:3)
Apple insists they don't need Google, so why would Google wait for them to be dropped.
If Google pulls their iPhone apps it could result in an antitrust action against Google. This way, any antitrust action would be against Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
No one ever got antitrust action against them for withdrawing one of their own services. If so, I guess Apple would be in trouble for not making an iTunes app for Android, and Microsoft would be in trouble for not porting Word to Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
IANAL, but: Neither Apple nor Google are monopolies in any related market, so they have no monopoly power to abuse. They're both a long way from the long arm of anti-trust laws, at least with mapping...
Re: (Score:2)
Alienating iOS users is not in Google's best interest. iOS is more profitable to Google than Android, and thats before development costs are even considered. Most mobile search requests are served to iOS users, iOS is the mobile platform with the highest CPM, Safari is the most popular mobile browser, iOS users are all guaranteed to be using high-end products and thus have money to spend, and even if none of the previously mentioned facts were true, it would be stupid for an advertisement company to alien
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly, because they never did the Xbox, which is even more closed and controlled, right?
Re:Lawrence Kansas? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Lawrence Kansas? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Lawrence Kansas? (Score:5, Informative)
Here you go:
https://encrypted.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=google+earth+for+linux&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CJABEBYwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fearth.google.com%2Fdownload-earth.html&ei=Ey8SUOvFLKWC4gTgw4GgCA&usg=AFQjCNHtn4NvUOUoKADPf8ZRNSfED_pErQ&sig2=JNYJ97i-H8p5KMdCEixRHA [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Really?
Google Earth is one of the few things that _is_ supported on Linux at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
Which city would that be?
Vatican City.
Re: (Score:3)
I hate to admit it, but where I live, Bing Maps actually has the newest satellite/overhead views.
Because Microsoft was last to build its database?
Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness (Score:5, Insightful)
Rapideye, at least change your characteristic style with the commas and punctuation if you want to act like someone else.
Re: (Score:3)
Nice try Rapideye.
Re:All Really Good - its about the Freshness (Score:4, Insightful)
It could simply be that the images for Canada are newer. Google tends to start projects in the US first and then expand them later - and later comes better cameras, faster and denser storage, and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
It's this. I went on Mapcrunch and jumped around urban CAN/USA random locations. I couldn't find a single shot in Canada that was older than 2009. They all looked great. Most of the USA ones looked just as good, with the exception of those images taken in 2008 or earlier. Those ones were obviously lower quality (especially scenes dated 2007).
Re: (Score:2)
fata complete
I think you perhaps were reaching for "fait accompli", but you fell short and proved not only that you're a frothing nit, but an illiterate one at that.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly how, when, and what did they lose or are losing to Google?
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, no it doesn't. On the contrary, because there are many groups competing to build a decent android phone, and a decent android launcher, and a decent android screen etc, some of them will be pretty fucking terrible. We don't buy from those, we buy from those that succeed. That was precisely the parent's point.
Re: (Score:2)
a city in Rome?
Yes, The Vatican.