"[Apple's] problem is that they thought they did not have a problem."<p>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.
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 <i>hundreds</i> of people or they didn't bother to read the article in the first place.<p>0 - <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/" rel="nofollow">http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-go...</a>
> 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.<p>This just amazes me.<p>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.<p>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.
The article has no mention of <i>why</i> this is a 400 year advantage - or how long it will take for Apple to get over this.<p>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.<p>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.
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.<p>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.<p>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.<p>The current maps application in iOS already has a feedback interface. This helps to improve the data.<p>But there are a few things which need more consideration:<p>* 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.<p>* 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.<p>* 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, ...<p>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.
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.<p>All things considered, given how complex maps must be to implement, it seems like Apple did a pretty good job for day one.<p>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.
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.
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.<p>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.<p>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.<p>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.
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."
<i>> 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</i><p>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.
Articles like this make me suspect that <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367517</a> was an extremely accurate description of Apple's problems.<p>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 <i>the gaze of Barad-dûr</i>?
The real question is: How many Apple users or would-be Apple users consider mapping to be critically important?<p>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.<p>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.<p>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.<p>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.
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.
Excellent post, full of valuable insight.<p><i>Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google was able to do when it started its mapping project.</i><p>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.
There was an amazing blog post (<a href="http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-maps-label-read..." rel="nofollow">http://41latitude.com/post/2072504768/google-maps-label-read...</a>) 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.<p>EDIT: Here is an archived version found elsewhere: <a href="http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-amp-Label-Readability-Part-3" rel="nofollow">http://www.allhatter.com/showthread.php/13017-Google-Maps-am...</a>
> I suspect that Apple does not yet understand what a headache it will be to integrate the information from these three disparate sources.<p>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.
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.
> [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.<p>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.<p>> Apple lacks the ability to mine vast amounts of local search data, as Google was able to do when it started its mapping project<p>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.
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).<p>I just wonder why fix something that ain't broke and make it worse!
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.
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.<p>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?<p>Fascinating article.
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.
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.
> 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.<p>Wasn't iOS6 in public beta for a few months?
In bigger-picture terms, Apple doing their own maps is surely a good thing because of the competition it creates.<p>Surely it's going to end up pushing improvements in maps technology.
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.