The title is a little misleading. It may be more efficient compared to the 5 years old Google Maps app on iOS, but Google Maps for Android has been vector based since December 16th, 2010, when they launched Google Maps 5.0.<p><a href="http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2010/12/under-hood-of-google-maps-50-for.html" rel="nofollow">http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2010/12/under-hood-of-googl...</a><p>Also don't forget Apple's Maps retrieve a lot less data than Google Maps, since they don't actually have that data. Google Maps offers a lot more information.
Apple maps has caused me plenty of headaches so far, but hearing this definitely pleases me. I remember traveling lost in Beijing and just ripping through my AT&T international data plan using maps to get back to my hotel.<p>Sure, with Apple maps I won't even <i>find</i> my hotel, but at least I'll do it five times more efficiently!
This would be an assessment over the application and the efficiency of using vectors - thought it is interesting to hear that the satellite maps show a win as well.<p>When I'm traveling internationally, and have roaming disabled, I use Google Maps in "Standard View" very cautiously - keenly aware of that $0.15/megabyte charge I'm racking up.<p>So, for those cities that do have decent road layouts, routing, and POI information - this actually is a nice little benefit.
Can anyone compare this to the Google Maps on Android? Downloading vector based map will obviously use less data than raster map image (different one at different zoom level nonetheless). I don't see how this is much of a news.
Customer: It's not much of a cheese shop, is it?<p>Owner: Finest in the district!<p>Customer: (annoyed) Explain the logic underlying that conclusion, please.<p>Owner: Well, it's so clean, sir!<p>Customer: It's certainly uncontaminated by cheese....<p><a href="http://www.minderella.com/words/cheeseshop.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.minderella.com/words/cheeseshop.htm</a>
Google Maps for Android has an offline cache, which is a huge advantage, especially for those traveling in subways without a data connection. Would love to see that show up on iOS.
I guess, it's a lot easier to be data efficient... When you have next to no map data to retrieve in the first place. I am tired of hearing about Apple's Maps, whether it's good or bad, everyone can agree (even Apple themselves agree) that the maps application is sub-par and finding nice things to say about it doesn't change the fact that if you want to get somewhere the new Apple Maps can only promise to get you within 80km of the location you want to be in (if you're lucky), not to mention the missing landmarks, weird black and white colouring of some areas and missing roads.<p>Let's not detract away from the real problem here. Lets see if Apple Maps are as data efficient in 5 years when they catch up to half the level that Google Maps are currently at provided they work day and night to get to that stage.
That's great, but I'm sure most people would rather spend more data in exchange for more accurate and complete maps.<p>Another thing to remember: with LTE larger maps wouldn't even take much longer to download.
For the umpteenth time:<p><i>There was never a Google Maps app on the iPhone, there was an Apple app powered by Google's data</i>.<p>The correct way of stating this is that Apple's iOS6 maps app is more data efficient than previous versions. As for the main reason the current app is more efficient is that it relies on vector graphics instead of image tiles, a technique Google have been using on Android for nearly 2 years:
<a href="http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2010/12/under-hood-of-google-maps-50-for.html" rel="nofollow">http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2010/12/under-hood-of-googl...</a><p>Another Android maps feature lets users select areas to cache offline, which I imagine saves even more data (it auto-caches frequented areas): <a href="http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2012/06/go-offline-with-google-maps-for-android.html" rel="nofollow">http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2012/06/go-offline-with-g...</a><p>That feature is also worth mentioning for when Apple duplicates it and some people try to convince themselves that it was Apple's idea.