IOS 6 worth the update?


Recommended Posts

well I definitely agree that Google maps is MUCH better than Apple Maps, but they have had A LOT more time to build up their information and photos.. I think Apple maps will get better with time for sure.

well I definitely agree that Google maps is MUCH better than Apple Maps, but they have had A LOT more time to build up their information and photos.. I think Apple maps will get better with time for sure.

I agree with you that Apple are in this for the long haul and it will improve over time.

But here is the thing, they make no money off this Maps system. We as users do not buy the Maps it comes with our devices and the prices of those devices will be unchanged wether this maps system or googles map system or Microsoft's is included. So my point is, since they are not able to monetize their maps why push it out at this point in time when it is not finished? Usually when a company pushes a product in to the lime light before it is ready but semi-functional it is because they need to get some revenue to finish it but Apple isn't in that position.

We could have enjoyed Google Maps for another 2 years while Apple spent a billion dollars on photography vehicles, aerial shots, 3D Models of more places. I mean heck they could have included the public transit information if they held this back another 2 years for sure.

The situation right now just feels to me like Apple arrogance. They truly believe some 3D buildings are enough to distract us away from the fact this thing is missing some very key features that made Googles Maps great. Yes we did not have turn by turn directions before but there was nothing to stop Apple from simply including that whole functionality with their own maps inside the old Google Maps. They could have quite easily switched mapping engines as soon as you selected Turn by Turn which would negate the Google licensing issues. And since all this stuff is basically web based anyway it wouldn't make the application bloated.

I'm not saying this whole thing is a big deal because it's not, Google will release their own Maps application soon and it will be just as good as the Android version I'm sure. But I'm disappointed that Apple decided to unleash this before it was ready. If there is one thing Apple continually gets right it is implementation, I feel they have really great designers and that has allowed them to make lovely looking software but when it comes to maps you need data to underpin that user interface and it's just not there. This is in my opinion a big fail on their part and if anything it shows how far behind Google they are in this area.

And this is coming from me, someone that just ordered an iPhone 5 the other day. :rofl:

Maps app is probably the worst piece of software ever released by Apple.

If you were using Google Apps at all on your iPhone / iPad, do not update to iOS 6.

I cannot believe how Apple could have allowed such a piece of **** to be ever released on their flagship product.

I'm not saying this whole thing is a big deal because it's not, Google will release their own Maps application soon and it will be just as good as the Android version I'm sure.

Wouldn't that go against the requirements of the App Store? A Map app from google would definitely duplicate a core iOS functionality (or non-functionality in the case of Apple's incredibly crappy Maps app).

Does anyone know if the new map app has traffic feature like Google.maps had?

This is what i mean:

http://cultofmac.cul...raffic-Maps.jpg

Is it any good?

It does support traffic, but it isn't that good yet.

There is no new skeuomorphism in iOS 6 that iOS 5 didn't already have except for the new Passbook application which didn't exist on iOS 5.

I know. However, I thought iOS 6 was going to make all apps skeuomorphism. It would unify the iPad and OS X UI. Currently, it clashes with the pinstripes and looks like a mess. Why is everybody f*ckin' with their UI lately? Did I miss something?

People give Apple a break. I am sure they will fix this soon. As with every OS developer out there, Microsoft included, nothing is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. I am sure we will see a fix in the next few days or couple of weeks. Give them time to figure it out.

Apple should have Siri sing "London bridge is falling down" when using the maps app.

tumblr_manlg1zhwq1rhptwbo1_1280.png

Maybe you should be a little patient and let the application finish rendering. The rendering takes a little time and if your reception is not so good or you are having interference on your cellular reception then it will take even longer.

As you can see, I had absolutely no issues with it. Same bridge.

acdXTbxV.jpg

add4QChp.jpg

acvHHQMs.jpg

Apple maps found the chinese place near me which google maps doesnt

Looks like you were lucky.

Shibuya station (Tokyo, Japan) handles roughly 2.5 million passengers on an average weekday. If it wasn't enough that most of the info about its surroundings have disappeared or are completely wrong, the station itself is nowhere to be seen on Apple Maps. It maybe not obvious but the picture below shows the exact same location on Google Maps (mobile version) and the new Apple Maps:

compare.png

How about the world's busiest train station (used by an average of 3.7 million people per day), Shinjuku, with a total of 52 platforms and over 200 exits:

shinjuku.jpg

And wonderful satellite imagery:

42d22cd8-s.jpg

People give Apple a break. I am sure they will fix this soon. As with every OS developer out there, Microsoft included, nothing is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. I am sure we will see a fix in the next few days or couple of weeks. Give them time to figure it out.

It's all about first impressions. And frankly, this is entirely Apple's own fault, the result of their own arrogance to want to control yet another market that they previously had little to not foothold in. It's poetic, really.

Steve Jobs would have never let that Maps App see the light of day if it wasn't working properly. He would have never allowed that.

I think there would have been a little more effort in to the maps app if he was still with us. How do you change the name up in the left hand corrner. Where the iPhone or Ipod is supost to be??

I dunno why people keep thinking Maps would have been substantially better if Steve Jobs was still alive. He's human and makes mistakes. Steve Jobs was alive when the G4 Cube was released, when Apple tried to get into the filtering business with KidSafe, the eCards business with iCards, MobileMe and Ping. All of those products or services ultimately failed, despite Steve Jobs being alive.

They are not saying he would have made it better. He simply would not have allowed it to be released in its current form. And if it did (a la mobileme leading him to fire half the team) heads would be rolling.

Now, can you imagine Tim Cook, Mr squeaky clean, being a total dick (which is absolutely necessary to be a CEO) to subordinates that messed up? No. Unfortunately while he is a great logistics guy, I do not see him as being the same caliber leader as Steve J.

Funniest thing Ive heard of in apple maps, is Scotlands satellite map is covered in cloud.....pretty realistic then :p

ach good luck to them, brave move by Apple to even try to compete against google maps, navigation and street view (albeit 5 years behind but they gotta start somewhere) give it 5 years and Apple will claim they invented online mapping apps........

I used it tonight, it finally gives you time with traffic for every suggested route (Google maps didn't), and it did perfect voice navigation. Plus you can rotate the map for fun.

Soooooo... stop complaining. It's six of one, half dozen of the other. It's not like Google maps was the paragon of greatness on iOS.

I dunno why people keep thinking Maps would have been substantially better if Steve Jobs was still alive. He's human and makes mistakes. Steve Jobs was alive when the G4 Cube was released, when Apple tried to get into the filtering business with KidSafe, the eCards business with iCards, MobileMe and Ping. All of those products or services ultimately failed, despite Steve Jobs being alive.

I am not saying it would have been better if he was alive. What I mean is, the product would have never been released at the shape it's on right now. Steve Jobs was a perfectionist and he would have never allowed Maps to be released in that condition - broken and useless. Tim Cook is an ass and I honestly don't like him at all. I don't think he has what it takes to make Apple succesfull. He's no Steve Jobs and like it or not, Steve Jobs may have been arrogant to some, an a...hole to others, but the man was smart and had a vision and protected Apple's reputation with his life.

Oh and by the way, iCards is not a dead product. It is still alive and well, but it is now called Cards:

http://www.apple.com/apps/cards/

Steve Jobs was alive when the G4 Cube was released,

Yes, and the G4 Cube is one of the most iconic, beloved computer Apple -or any company- ever released.

It's part of the MoMA collection and still has a cult following to this day, more than 10 years after it was discontinued.

It failed commercially, no question about it, but it was a great product.

when Apple tried to get into the filtering business with KidSafe, the eCards business with iCards, MobileMe and Ping. All of those products or services ultimately failed, despite Steve Jobs being alive.

To be honest I've never used any of these services but it's true that with the notable exception of the immensely successful iTunes and the App Store, Apple doesn't have great web services/products.

Steve Jobs admitted that much in a number of interviews and has mentioned a number of times that iCloud has been built fixing all the mistakes of their past web products.

However, the big difference I see between MobileMe, Ping and the new Maps app, is that while the former were maybe missing some features (I wouldn't know, never used them) the latter is completely broken.

There's a huge difference between allowing the release of a new product that hasn't all the latest bells and whistles, and release one that is obviously completely broken.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!