Apple Maps Has Surpassed Google Maps in Detail in 3.1 Percent of the US (theverge.com) 135
An anonymous reader shares a report: iOS 12 began the rollout of Apple Maps' long-awaited redesign, which will deliver maps with far more detail using data collected by Apple directly. The updated maps currently only cover around 3.1 percent of the USA, focused around Northern California, but already some interesting differences are starting to emerge between Apple's maps and those that Google uses for its own navigation software. The differences are documented in excruciatingly fine detail in a post by digital cartography blogger Justin O'Beirne. The good news for Apple is that the sheer amount of natural cartographical detail its map contains far outstrips what Google currently offers. Vegetation detail is a particular highlight, with Apple's maps even showing grass between two lanes of a highway, or around the borders of individual houses.
well then (Score:5, Funny)
Vegetation detail is a particular highlight, with Apple's maps even showing grass between two lanes of a highway, or around the borders of individual houses.
I guess next time I'm looking for exceptionally grassy highway medians, I'll buy an Apple device.
Re:well then (Score:5, Interesting)
...I guess next time I'm looking for exceptionally grassy highway medians, I'll buy an Apple device....
Yes, go buy that device, Apple needs your help. There's probably a good reason why Apple switched to reporting revenue instead of unit device sales. The unit device sales are on a downward trend, so Apple has been raising the per-device price in order to keep revenue increasing. It's a good tactic until Apple's customer base gets wise to it.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They're committed to the Rolex model. Look for a 10k$ iphone. The MacIdiots will WANT that.
Re: (Score:1)
I feel sorry for them. Chumps.
Re: well then (Score:1)
And no fussy blinkers either!
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, that's Audi Drivers, the "cream" of the crop, so to speak.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So you claim Android makers are failing harder? (Score:2)
There's probably a good reason why Apple switched to reporting revenue instead of unit device sales
Because every other phone maker does the same thing?
Or maybe it's because sales are starting to decline, and all the other companies have been doing the same because all their sales have been much worse.
Apple is shifting to have users use phones longer and capture revenue in many other ways, so device figures shadow all of the other ways Apple makes money.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is shifting to have users use phones longer and capture revenue in many other ways
So you agree with what I wrote, that unit sales are down (users holding on to phones longer) and Apple is looking to capture revenue in different ways (raising prices per unit). :)
.
Apple is also increasing its service revenue, so that's a plus.
Re: (Score:2)
More realistically because Apple is looking to expand beyond just selling devices and the terminology reflects that. Interesting thing from the site https://www.apple.com/ios/maps... [apple.com], is right down the bottom https://www.apple.com/privacy/ [apple.com]. Apple is looking to target Google Maps head on.
Google is clearly going to come under increasing competitive pressure by well funded competitors. Google has managed to make a dick of itself and thus is quite vulnerable, it requires loads of users that like them and always
Re: (Score:2)
...I guess next time I'm looking for exceptionally grassy highway medians, I'll buy an Apple device....
Yes, go buy that device, Apple needs your help. There's probably a good reason why Apple switched to reporting revenue instead of unit device sales. The unit device sales are on a downward trend, so Apple has been raising the per-device price in order to keep revenue increasing. It's a good tactic until Apple's customer base gets wise to it.
Yeah, absolutely right - every single company that doesn't report sales has gone broke. Samsung, Huawei, Google, Dell, HP, etc. Every single one. The only thing that kept Apple afloat was reporting sales numbers.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Those "exceptionally grassy highway medians" are exceptionally useful for emergency landings in small private planes.
Just mentioning it.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck, even pilots are looking at their fucking phones instead of operating the vehicle with their full attention. Probably why an emergency landing was needed in the first place. And if you have ever actually LOOKED at these medians they are generally designed so people can't do stupid ass u-turns on highways, good fucking luck landing on that. Just saying.
Re: (Score:3)
And if you have ever actually LOOKED at these medians they are generally designed so people can't do stupid ass u-turns on highways, good fucking luck landing on that. Just saying.
In an emergency landing the goal is to skid to a stop somehow without dying, not touching down neatly. Highway medians work nicely.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The best glide speed (if it's making an emergency landing on a road then it probablly has an engine failure) of a small light aircraft is in the same ballpark as highway traffic speeds, so the relative speeds are likely to be managable as long as the road isn't too busy.
Re: (Score:2)
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when the aircraft can be used again. Landing in a field or median may result in more damage.
Here's a highway landing [youtube.com]
Re:well then (Score:5, Funny)
I guess next time I'm looking for exceptionally grassy highway medians, I'll buy an Apple device.
I've always suspected Apple fanbois were sheep...
Re: (Score:2)
I guess next time I'm looking for exceptionally grassy highway medians, I'll buy an Apple device.
I've always suspected Apple fanbois were sheep...
Bwa-a-a-a-a h-a-a-a-a h-a-a-a-a!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Makes you wonder where Apple are directing their resources... They are so far behind Google in every other way, and they concentrate on what for most people using their app are the least interesting bits.
Google uses AI to generate 3D models of buildings and other structures from satellite photos. It's incredibly good, most of the world has very detailed and accurate 3D data now. Their AI also understands what is sees in street view photographs, and adds detail to the maps. They have the best routing* and tr
Will never catch up to Google Maps' (Score:1)
constant privacy violations.
Re:The other 96.9%... (Score:5, Funny)
Timmy: "But my phone said to drive off the cliff, so I did of course."
Doctor: "Unfortunately you survived, Timmy."
Re: The other 96.9%... (Score:1)
The grassy detail still won't fix the constant navigation problems Apple Maps suffers from. I live in that "improved" 3.1% zone, albeit behind the redwood curtain in Northern Northern CA closer to OR than San Fran, and routing is still quite poor.
Take me to the place I asked for on normal roads, not to the former location years ago. Take me to the business entrance, not to some other business's entrance on the other side of the block the business occurs on. Country roads, take me home...
Re: (Score:1)
...will still have people driving into ditches or off cliffs.
Or across airport runways. [newser.com]
Parks? (Score:5, Insightful)
Historically green areas on maps (paper & digital) have been City, State, or Federal parks, now it's just any old patch of grass?
TheVerge was right, 'more detail, less information'
Re: Parks? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I think Apple's chosen to optimzie for the use-case "Show me some landmarks so I know where I am" over âoeI need to quickly identifiy all state and federal parks in this area".
If only there were some kind of global system that would tell you your position.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Apple's chosen to optimzie for the use-case "Show me some landmarks so I know where I am" over âoeI need to quickly identifiy all state and federal parks in this area".
If only there were some kind of global system that would tell you your position.
Yea, something that was satellite based and triangulated your position in 3D space as well as your speed... Hmmmm.. Think of the commercial applications for something like that, not to mention the military ones.. Oh my.
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds amazing. I cant wait for apple to innovate that.
Re: (Score:1)
Snarky, sure, but realistically, that's not always practical. Or maybe you've never driven with GPS and had to quickly decide which of several turns is the correct one? Or used a map on a phone while riding a bike, where you can only glance at it? Or tried to locate a coffee shop on a block in a city on a grid. I certainly appreciate a map with more landmarks over the game of walking up and down a block until the blue-dot matche
Re: Parks? (Score:1)
In any of those cases, I simply turn up the volume and it tells me exactly when to turn. It even tells me to be in a specific lane and if there's two instructions right next to reach other, it puts the two together (take the right lane for the Dave St exit, and keeo left)
Re: (Score:2)
None of those use cases are made better by identifying grass and trees as green. If the GPS misses a turn, it's still got you in the ballpark. And not being able to look at your device makes the question of land use color moot.
Re: (Score:1)
When I want to know where I am, I look at the name of the streets, or mile markers, not at patches of grass.
Re:Parks? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. It's a neat little feature to be sure, but if I really want to see where vegetation is, I switch to satellite view, which actually distinguishes between grass, small vs large trees, dense vs sparse patches of trees, crops, etc. The only case I see in that article where the vegetation detail is sort of useful is in identifying beaches.
But yes, when you look at those maps, you can still see the distinction between regular vegetation and parks, but it's very subtle and takes much more effort to distinguish. When I'm in an unfamiliar town and have a little time to kill, I'll actually be looking for parks to take my kids to, not random vegetation in the median.
Finally, that rest of that article just shows a bunch of cases where Apple is fixing things google already had correct, and several more where Apple is still wrong (and google is correct).
Re: (Score:2)
Historically green areas on maps (paper & digital) have been City, State, or Federal parks, now it's just any old patch of grass?
TheVerge was right, 'more detail, less information'
I guess I can see in theory how such details might better orient your brain to the map, to at least reassure you that the map is accurate and that you are on track.
Except ... that maps are deliberately simplified, abstracted representations of reality, and they are that for a reason.
There may be somebody somewhere who needs a ... er ... grass map, but it's not a typical driver who does.
Re: (Score:1)
If you need a grass map, try using a real source, like the usgs national map vegetation survey. In fact, use all the historical maps as well, or any other type available. But quickly, they appear to want to start charging for it instead of it being a useful resource. Though I find it funny since then the government will be paying itself for the data in cases like infrastructure development/maintenance/reconstruction to get the data the government already has.
So, for 96.9% of the U.S. google is better... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So, for 96.9% of the U.S. google is better... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not marketing hype. Rendering different details actually may be relevant. Unfortunately Apple seems to think that the green should be representative of trees rather than showing the boundaries of city parks or national parks as they are traditionally labelled.
It matters. It's marketing hype. It's also a stupid backwards idea that makes the map less useful.
Re: (Score:2)
That was my thought as well, but for a different reason. In my mind, there are two situations when I use a map. One is while driving. The other is while figuring out an area that I'm trying to learn about for some reason.
While driving, I want the fewest distractions possible. Beyond street shape and street names, every additional piece of visual information competing for my attention is more likely to be a distraction than a helpful hint. Maybe showing the names of businesses that are in the same cate
I'll just stand in the road, car yonder is tiny (Score:1)
So, for 96.9% of the U.S. google is better...
You really can't see the upcoming future on this one, eh?
Now that Apple has got a system down why can they not scale it t quickly close the gap.
Will you be singing the same tune I wonder when within a year Apple has 60%+ better coverage.
It makes sense to me that Apple could easily surpass Google Maps in detail, as Google in recent years has really lost focus and does not spend much time improving long-standing services.
Re:I'll just stand in the road, car yonder is tiny (Score:4, Insightful)
So, for 96.9% of the U.S. google is better...
You really can't see the upcoming future on this one, eh?
Now that Apple has got a system down why can they not scale it t quickly close the gap.
Will you be singing the same tune I wonder when within a year Apple has 60%+ better coverage.
It makes sense to me that Apple could easily surpass Google Maps in detail, as Google in recent years has really lost focus and does not spend much time improving long-standing services.
and with a competitor (Apple) increasing coverage, I'm sure Google will just idly sit by and not do any updates or anything like that.
Re: (Score:1)
So they won't be able to experience the joy of explaining to the police that their GPS routed them through an airport runway?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, I suspect for Google they can throw a switch
I suspect the opposite. The reality is that Google Maps change continuously in such small ways that you barely notice. It's literally under constant development. However if obfuscating details like national park boundaries or state parks is what makes Apple Maps great, then I truly hope that Google doesn't attempt to compete.
Re: (Score:2)
do you think the images they currently serve are served at their highest resolution, or just at an optimal quality for use right now?
Of course not ,just as the same is not true of Apple either - if you'd bothered to read the article you'd see Apple has been gathering this data they used in CA from across the U.S. for years now.
Re: (Score:2)
Misleading Slashdot Article Title! (Score:1)
"Apple Maps Has Surpassed Google Maps in Detail in 3.1 Percent of the US" this would seem to suggest that Apple is starting to surpass Google Maps. But when you read Justin's linked web page, you see how bad Apple Maps is compared to Google Maps. Haha.
Fuck me (Score:5, Insightful)
That is exciting news!
I guess "Google maps are more detailed than Apple's in 96.9% of US" didn't really score enough Apple fanboi points, did it?
My map better than Google or Apple in 0.000001% (Score:1, Funny)
My own picture map is better for my own house than either Google or Apple. Can I get an article too?
scaling (Score:2)
If the data collection process doesn't scale, then this is just a toy tech demo. 99.9999% of the time, I'm not in the 3% covered area, and neither are most people.
Re: scaling (Score:2)
But it really does. I'm not going to use one map app for the city then have to switch it out at some indeterminate point where its data begins to suck for another map app I'm not familiar with.
What are the benefits? (Score:2)
The big question is how this extra detail is useful. In particular, is there any impact on the quality of navigation? I don't see how any of the examples mentioned in the article impact creation of routes. Perhaps there might be an impact in terms of choosing routing endpoints. For example, more accurate layouts for parking lots and access points might allow choosing a better destination point. However, this type of information is usually manually digested, and satellite and street-view information is
Apple Maps! (Score:2)
Do people not remember the joys of Apple Maps? [businessinsider.com] ;)
Project out of money after 3.1% coverage (Score:3)
High detail is useless (Score:3)
If the data isn't useless. I'm glad now that the grassy forest patches are rendered in fine detail while Apple mislabels it as a busy city centre.
Re: (Score:1)
If the data isn't useless. I'm glad now that the grassy forest patches are rendered in fine detail while Apple mislabels it as a busy city centre.
Hey, now the homeless know where they can drive in tent stakes and sleep on soft grass, just consult their I-Device and volia! Honey, I'm Home!
Now we just need a program that gives away cell phones....
Re: (Score:2)
and volia!
Well that's a new one.
Summer or Winter? (Score:4, Funny)
I hope they do a full refresh at least once a month, otherwise, their pictures of my green grass or leafy trees aren't going to match seasonal reality. If accuracy is a serious goal, that is.
That's all great and everything... (Score:3)
There's been heavy road construction near my house for around 6 months. A few days a week, the road is down to a single lane so they will stop traffic in one direction while letting the other side through. That will cause a kilometer long backup real quick. Waze will alert me, if enough Wazers report it, but Google Maps is even more hit and miss.
When I'm driving, I don't need to look at the patch of grass between highways. I need better intelligence around traffic
So google wins 96.9% of the time? (Score:2)
So fuckin what? (Score:2)
3.1% is extremely non-impressive. Apple is in the early stages of a death spiral, they got nothing anymore. Overpriced junk.
Re: (Score:3)
3.1% is extremely non-impressive. Apple is in the early stages of a death spiral, they got nothing anymore. Overpriced junk.
I'm no apple fanboy, but the news reporting over's Apple's demise is WAY to soon. They may be hitting their peek and driven their business so large they've run out of customers who can buy their stuff, but they are FAR from heading into a death spiral. They have money to burn and could heat their new headquarters with $100 bills for decades.
Anybody who parrots this "news" is either a fool or is shorting the stock and looking for a quick buck by talking down the stock (maybe both).
And they seem anxious to show it off... (Score:2)
... judging by the roundabout paths that app tends to lead us on.
Even has a hard core apple guy.... (Score:5, Informative)
Even as a hard core Apple guy, I have to say, who cares?
My experience with Apple Maps has been so miserable that I deleted it from my phone as soon as I had the chance. I cannot imagine ever giving it another try, no matter how good it becomes. I do not think they could ever be good enough to get me off Google Maps which works, almost, every time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can imagine the conversation, "Oh look, my phone says there is a green something or fucken o
Re: (Score:3)
That probably puts you in the minority. No, I'm not joking. The power of defaults is huge, and most of the people on Apple devices are using Apple Maps.
Apple's biggest problem has been relying on other people for data. They used to have TomTom as a map provider, and the maps were terrible. As it says in the article, some of the map data TomTom was using was 70 years out of date, collected from extremely old sources. And so every time someone logged a fix to Apple Maps, it had to go through Apple then to Tom
3.1% of the time (Score:1)
What I hate about Google maps (Score:2)
I've driven enough in rural areas to know that that's how they mark a lot of their roads. But I'm guessing 90% of the exits here in the USA use "Bancroft", not "2A".
Re: (Score:2)
Exits signs in California are numbered, don't know about the rest of the country. If it matches what you're seeing on the sign, the number can be useful because it tells you how many more exits you'll pass before the one you want. Obviously saying both name and number would be best.
Re: (Score:2)
But I'm guessing 90% of the exits here in the USA use "Bancroft", not "2A".
I'm guessing that you're guessing wrong. I've only driven in the northeastern US, but every major highway (and many not-so-major highways) I've been on uses exit numbers with one or two location names (usually a street or city/town) underneath. I just wish more states would switch from sequential exit numbers to mile-based exit numbers.
Not relevant (Score:3)
Thing is, what Apple is getting OCD about here is only a subset of what makes Google Maps superior.
The detail of Google Maps is more than sufficient for me to determine where I am and route me from A to B. However, on top of that is a myriad of metadata and hyperlinked info and resources that all work together to make Google Maps an all-encompassing tool for which "maps" is only a part of.
It really doesn't matter if for a tiny section of the USA, Apple Maps tracks the curve of a driveway around a house with pixel-perfect accuracy. That's not relevant nor does it somehow make Apple Maps more useful. It's still a stinking pile of shit and I'm glad it's limited only to the over-priced status-symbol trash that comes out of Apple's factories.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't OCD. If Apple were OCD they'd understand the purpose of a map and its colour scheme. This is some marketing rubbish driving product design making the result less useful overall.
Google did the same thing with their iterations of Maps but in different ways. Their choices of what and how to label now make absolutely no sense prioritising the lack of information (boundaries and exclusions around large labels) over specific destinations of interest. https://www.justinobeirne.com/... [justinobeirne.com]
In other news (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Close. If you read the article, Google Maps has more detail than Apple Maps in 96.9 percent of the US, but more accuracy in only 100% or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Close. If you read the article, Google Maps has more detail than Apple Maps in 96.9 percent of the US, but more accuracy in only 100% or so.
And the "green space" that Apple added to the basic street map can be seen in much more detail when you switch to satellite view in Google maps. Like others, I don't see the benefit...
I wonder if... (Score:2)
AppleMAPS == useless (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s hyperbole. 3% is dog food in a bowl in comparison to the quantity of mapping not quantized worldwide to become functional, as in rely upon.
South America is abyssamal beyond placing country boundaries, LAT/LON and major cities. Apple would do well to nail one continent - then apply lessons learned at scale.
In other news... (Score:2)
Google maps has more detail in 96.9% of the US.
Damning with faint praise... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cash (Score:2)
Cool. And how much more does Apple Maps cost than a free Android/Windows/Browser app?
That's not detail (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I picked my nose. Pretty sure that's better.