The Apple iPhone Thread (2 Viewers)

[Otis]

What's the consensus on black vs. white?

Poor people pick black. Rich Canadians pick white

I always thought that men got the black and women got the white.

I have held this same opinion as well.

My wife and I got his and hers -- black for me, white for her. Any men in here carrying white phones seriously?

 

[chet]

What's the consensus on black vs. white?

Poor people pick black. Rich Canadians pick white

I always thought that men got the black and women got the white.

I have held this same opinion as well.

My wife and I got his and hers -- black for me, white for her. Any men in here carrying white phones seriously?

I might. Problem?

 

[Goat Herders]

I have a white 4. Was considering a white 5 next week.

 

[D-Day]

What's the consensus on black vs. white?

Poor people pick black. Rich Canadians pick white

I always thought that men got the black and women got the white.

I have held this same opinion as well.

My wife and I got his and hers -- black for me, white for her. Any men in here carrying white phones seriously?

Captain Over to the white courtesy phone... If the white phone is good enough for him, then it is good enough for me. By the way, do you like movies about gladiators?

 

[Billy Bats]

Got my wife a white 64 today but she wants to switch to Verizon so unless I take it, it's going back to Best Buy--it's an AT&T phone.

Dude, sell it on EBAY

 

[chet]

Got my wife a white 64 today but she wants to switch to Verizon so unless I take it, it's going back to Best Buy--it's an AT&T phone.

Dude, sell it on EBAY

WTF is going on here? These are available--who would pay $1000+?

 

[Billy Bats]

Got my wife a white 64 today but she wants to switch to Verizon so unless I take it, it's going back to Best Buy--it's an AT&T phone.

Dude, sell it on EBAY

WTF is going on here? These are available--who would pay $1000+?

They're not available in all countries overseas yet. Put that thing up right now, just seen one go for almost $1,300.

 

[chet]

Got my wife a white 64 today but she wants to switch to Verizon so unless I take it, it's going back to Best Buy--it's an AT&T phone.

Dude, sell it on EBAY

WTF is going on here? These are available--who would pay $1000+?

They're not available in all countries overseas yet. Put that thing up right now, just seen one go for almost $1,300.

Even if its tied to my wife's number?

 

[Billy Bats]

Got my wife a white 64 today but she wants to switch to Verizon so unless I take it, it's going back to Best Buy--it's an AT&T phone.

Dude, sell it on EBAY

WTF is going on here? These are available--who would pay $1000+?

They're not available in all countries overseas yet. Put that thing up right now, just seen one go for almost $1,300.

Even if its tied to my wife's number?

Oh, no that changes things. These are unopened, factory sealed boxes. Still might be able to get a little more than you paid and not have to pay BBs restocking fee.

 

[adonis]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

How do you create an icon on your home screen to google's webapp as Tim Cook suggests in the letter?

 

[Keerock]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

How do you create an icon on your home screen to google's webapp as Tim Cook suggests in the letter?

http://lifehacker.com/5809338/add-web-site-bookmarks-to-your-iphones-homescreen

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

How do you create an icon on your home screen to google's webapp as Tim Cook suggests in the letter?

http://lifehacker.com/5809338/add-web-site-bookmarks-to-your-iphones-homescreen

:whoa:Thanks!

 

[adonis]

This was quite possibly the best apology Apple has ever made.

Lighter, integrates well with other products, highly polished, and timely.

I know I'm buying it now that it's out.

 

[belljr]

Got my wife a white 64 today but she wants to switch to Verizon so unless I take it, it's going back to Best Buy--it's an AT&T phone.

Dude, sell it on EBAY

WTF is going on here? These are available--who would pay $1000+?

They're not available in all countries overseas yet. Put that thing up right now, just seen one go for almost $1,300.

Even if its tied to my wife's number?

Take out the sim card. Then it's tied to no one

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Just became eligible to upgrade at discounted pricing today. When I go onto the Verizon website to order, it says it will ship by 10/26. Will I have better luck just walking in to a Verizon store this afternoon?

Yea, probably. If you really want it today, call around, even to secondary options like Radioshack and Walmart.

Appreciate the suggestion. Didn't get a chance to go out last night, but I stopped into a Verizon store today and they said they were sold out and wouldn't be getting more until 10/26. Headed straight from there to Radio Shack and they had just gotten a few more in.

 

[joffer]

Streamed the Ryder Cup to the phone this morning while I was on the course. Couldn't believe how good the picture was. This thing rocks

 

[sho nuff]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

 

[goonsquad]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

 

[Billy Bats]

Just became eligible to upgrade at discounted pricing today. When I go onto the Verizon website to order, it says it will ship by 10/26. Will I have better luck just walking in to a Verizon store this afternoon?

Yea, probably. If you really want it today, call around, even to secondary options like Radioshack and Walmart.

Appreciate the suggestion. Didn't get a chance to go out last night, but I stopped into a Verizon store today and they said they were sold out and wouldn't be getting more until 10/26. Headed straight from there to Radio Shack and they had just gotten a few more in.

 

[Smack Tripper]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

 

[Goat Herders]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Because google wouldn't allow them to include turn by turn in the iOS license. So apple either had to keep using a system that would mean an inferior product or they had to move to something else.

 

[goonsquad]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Google wouldn't allow Apple to incorporate the above features into iOS Maps while Android had them, putting iOS at a severe competitive disadvantage.

 

[adonis]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He didn't admit it was a screwup, he basically said the Maps app doesn't live up to peoples expectations. But the truth is it's simply not possible to put out a maps app that would have lived up to peoples expectations, without a few years of data collection and crowd-sourcing.It wasn't a strategic mistake, the app itself is better than google maps app, and in a short amount of time it will be as good as google maps ever was in terms of data.

They scored a 95% on the test and are apologizing for not scoring 100% because that's what people expect.

 

[Maelstrom]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Google wouldn't allow Apple to incorporate the above features into iOS Maps while Android had them, putting iOS at a severe competitive disadvantage.

Link? (Or I assume it is speculation.)

 

[Goat Herders]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Google wouldn't allow Apple to incorporate the above features into iOS Maps while Android had them, putting iOS at a severe competitive disadvantage.

Link? (Or I assume it is speculation.)

No, it's pretty well known that google would not allow them to incorporate turn by turn as long as they were using googles maps. I'm guessing apple would have liked a short extension of the agreement while they worked on their maps and google probably wouldn't budge on a long term deal. So apple was forced to go to market with a subpar offering.

 

[tommyGunZ]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Google wouldn't allow Apple to incorporate the above features into iOS Maps while Android had them, putting iOS at a severe competitive disadvantage.

Link? (Or I assume it is speculation.)

No, it's pretty well known that google would not allow them to incorporate turn by turn as long as they were using googles maps. I'm guessing apple would have liked a short extension of the agreement while they worked on their maps and google probably wouldn't budge on a long term deal. So apple was forced to go to market with a subpar offering.

That doesn't seem to make sense from Google's standpoint. Why wouldn't Google want iOS users to use Google maps? The consumer data would be worth boatloads to Google.

 

[Maelstrom]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Google wouldn't allow Apple to incorporate the above features into iOS Maps while Android had them, putting iOS at a severe competitive disadvantage.

Link? (Or I assume it is speculation.)

No, it's pretty well known that google would not allow them to incorporate turn by turn as long as they were using googles maps. I'm guessing apple would have liked a short extension of the agreement while they worked on their maps and google probably wouldn't budge on a long term deal. So apple was forced to go to market with a subpar offering.

That doesn't seem to make sense from Google's standpoint. Why wouldn't Google want iOS users to use Google maps? The consumer data would be worth boatloads to Google.

Yup, while the Apple fans can believe that it was because Google refused to update Maps, I will, until presented evidence otherwise, that Apple refused to let Google update Maps because they've been working on their own version to roll out. Plus Jobs hated Google towards the end and this is part (IMO) of the thermonuclear war he declared.Given how Google operates, I don't believe they just told Apple to go suck it and be happy with Maps as they were. If they could have upgraded it, I fully expect that they would have. Android has other competitive advantages, they didn't need to hold Maps ransom.

 

[Goat Herders]

It's a licensing agreement for a lot of money. In light of apples attacks on android by proxy, I can absolutely see google saying "no turn by turn" or "sure, we would be glad to do another 5 year deal". The only way google could deal a blow to apple was via maps. Make no mistake: apple chose to get rid of google maps because they didn't like googles terms. They offered a much worse product and are likely to pay for it in customer happiness.

 

[Billy Bats]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

 

[Abraham]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

 

[Billy Bats]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

 

[Abraham]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

Wait -how much was it at apple?

 

[Billy Bats]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

Wait -how much was it at apple?

$550, early upgrade price. (actually $200 cheaper) She just bought another one.

 

[Goat Herders]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

Wait -how much was it at apple?

$550, early upgrade price. (actually $200 cheaper) She just bought another one.

I don't understand. If it was an upgrade then why wasn't it $200? Did she extend her contract?

 

[Billy Bats]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

Wait -how much was it at apple?

$550, early upgrade price. (actually $200 cheaper) She just bought another one.

I don't understand. If it was an upgrade then why wasn't it $200? Did she extend her contract?

She already purchased one at the upgrade price of $299. (she kept that one and is using it) She has three lines on her plan, she got a discounted early upgrade price for the other two lines that aren't eligible for an upgrade right now.

 

[goonsquad]

Yup, while the Apple fans can believe that it was because Google refused to update Maps, I will, until presented evidence otherwise, that Apple refused to let Google update Maps because they've been working on their own version to roll out. Plus Jobs hated Google towards the end and this is part (IMO) of the thermonuclear war he declared.

Given how Google operates, I don't believe they just told Apple to go suck it and be happy with Maps as they were. If they could have upgraded it, I fully expect that they would have. Android has other competitive advantages, they didn't need to hold Maps ransom.

You are completely wrong and I have already gone over this earlier in the thread. First, the original Maps app bundled on iOS was created by Apple, not Google. Apple licensed the map data from Google, but it was NOT a Google app as you assume. So it's your contention here that Apple itself refused to upgrade their own map app with turn by turn, voice and vector tiles for five years while Android enjoyed a clear competitive advantage in that arena? I already posted the official Google Maps Developer TOS that explicitly denies licensees turn-by-turn, you must have missed it last time. Here it is again:

© No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following:

(i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device.

 

[Goat Herders]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

Wait -how much was it at apple?

$550, early upgrade price. (actually $200 cheaper) She just bought another one.

I don't understand. If it was an upgrade then why wasn't it $200? Did she extend her contract?

She already purchased one at the upgrade price of $299. (she kept that one and is using it) She has three lines on her plan, she got a discounted early upgrade price for the other two lines that aren't eligible for an upgrade right now.

So she had to extend for how many years?

 

[Billy Bats]

The Mrs. just sold an unopened 32gb white AT&T iPhone 5 on EBay for $925.

Goodness.

Have no idea why. It was bought by someone in Cali. Originally we thought people overseas were buying them because they weren't available yet, or thinking that only upgrades are allowed to order the phone because they're back ordered? Whatever, but they're being sold for a nice profit on eBay. Even better we didn't pay full price, apple has been discounting them $100.

Wait -how much was it at apple?

$550, early upgrade price. (actually $200 cheaper) She just bought another one.

I don't understand. If it was an upgrade then why wasn't it $200? Did she extend her contract?

She already purchased one at the upgrade price of $299. (she kept that one and is using it) She has three lines on her plan, she got a discounted early upgrade price for the other two lines that aren't eligible for an upgrade right now.

So she had to extend for how many years?

I know her line was extended 2 years. Didn't ask what happened with the other two, I assume they would get her for 2 more years on those lines as well. But even if they did, she has an uncanny ability to call AT&T and get whatever she wants. Plus they're lines for her 2 kids, and they're too young to be getting any kind of quality phones anyway. Or when deemed old enough, they can get our hand me down iphones.

 

[zDragon]

Yup, while the Apple fans can believe that it was because Google refused to update Maps, I will, until presented evidence otherwise, that Apple refused to let Google update Maps because they've been working on their own version to roll out. Plus Jobs hated Google towards the end and this is part (IMO) of the thermonuclear war he declared.

Given how Google operates, I don't believe they just told Apple to go suck it and be happy with Maps as they were. If they could have upgraded it, I fully expect that they would have. Android has other competitive advantages, they didn't need to hold Maps ransom.

You are completely wrong and I have already gone over this earlier in the thread. First, the original Maps app bundled on iOS was created by Apple, not Google. Apple licensed the map data from Google, but it was NOT a Google app as you assume. So it's your contention here that Apple itself refused to upgrade their own map app with turn by turn, voice and vector tiles for five years while Android enjoyed a clear competitive advantage in that arena? I already posted the official Google Maps Developer TOS that explicitly denies licensees turn-by-turn, you must have missed it last time. Here it is again:

© No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following:

(i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device.

Isn't this the basic developer TOS? The one that everyone can use. Where is the deal that Apple signed with Google? They could have a very different deal in place. There is no way you can state why Apple decided not to license the API especially by pointing to a generic TOS to the API. Maybe Google wanted to much per device, wouldn't turn over data they wanted, would not include latitude capability or many other issues that could have came up. If you think Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony, etc have the same TOS as everyone else your not seeing the big picture.

 

[Goat Herders]

Yup, while the Apple fans can believe that it was because Google refused to update Maps, I will, until presented evidence otherwise, that Apple refused to let Google update Maps because they've been working on their own version to roll out. Plus Jobs hated Google towards the end and this is part (IMO) of the thermonuclear war he declared.

Given how Google operates, I don't believe they just told Apple to go suck it and be happy with Maps as they were. If they could have upgraded it, I fully expect that they would have. Android has other competitive advantages, they didn't need to hold Maps ransom.

You are completely wrong and I have already gone over this earlier in the thread. First, the original Maps app bundled on iOS was created by Apple, not Google. Apple licensed the map data from Google, but it was NOT a Google app as you assume. So it's your contention here that Apple itself refused to upgrade their own map app with turn by turn, voice and vector tiles for five years while Android enjoyed a clear competitive advantage in that arena? I already posted the official Google Maps Developer TOS that explicitly denies licensees turn-by-turn, you must have missed it last time. Here it is again:

© No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following:

(i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device.

Isn't this the basic developer TOS? The one that everyone can use. Where is the deal that Apple signed with Google? They could have a very different deal in place. There is no way you can state why Apple decided not to license the API especially by pointing to a generic TOS to the API. Maybe Google wanted to much per device, wouldn't turn over data they wanted, would not include latitude capability or many other issues that could have came up. If you think Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony, etc have the same TOS as everyone else your not seeing the big picture.

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

 

[goonsquad]

Yup, while the Apple fans can believe that it was because Google refused to update Maps, I will, until presented evidence otherwise, that Apple refused to let Google update Maps because they've been working on their own version to roll out. Plus Jobs hated Google towards the end and this is part (IMO) of the thermonuclear war he declared.

Given how Google operates, I don't believe they just told Apple to go suck it and be happy with Maps as they were. If they could have upgraded it, I fully expect that they would have. Android has other competitive advantages, they didn't need to hold Maps ransom.

You are completely wrong and I have already gone over this earlier in the thread. First, the original Maps app bundled on iOS was created by Apple, not Google. Apple licensed the map data from Google, but it was NOT a Google app as you assume. So it's your contention here that Apple itself refused to upgrade their own map app with turn by turn, voice and vector tiles for five years while Android enjoyed a clear competitive advantage in that arena? I already posted the official Google Maps Developer TOS that explicitly denies licensees turn-by-turn, you must have missed it last time. Here it is again:

© No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following:

(i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device.

Isn't this the basic developer TOS? The one that everyone can use. Where is the deal that Apple signed with Google? They could have a very different deal in place. There is no way you can state why Apple decided not to license the API especially by pointing to a generic TOS to the API. Maybe Google wanted to much per device, wouldn't turn over data they wanted, would not include latitude capability or many other issues that could have came up. If you think Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony, etc have the same TOS as everyone else your not seeing the big picture.

Fine, but it doesn't change the fact that Apple's license didn't allow for turn-by-turn so it became necessary to find another provider solution. Whether Google flat out denied the functionality or demanded a king's ransom for it doesn't really change the equation; if these functions were readily available to Apple then the old Maps would have had them. They were not, so Apple was forced to make this move to be competitive with Android.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

 

[Slapdash]

It's OK guys, Tim Cook apologizes.

So he admits it was a screwup...but you and goons still can't?

He apologized for the short term frustration that is coming along with making necessary transition. Which is exactly what I've been saying all along.

We launched Maps initially with the first version of iOS. As time progressed, we wanted to provide our customers with even better Maps including features such as turn-by-turn directions, voice integration, Flyover and vector-based maps. In order to do this, we had to create a new version of Maps from the ground up.

why was this a "necessary" transition?

Google wouldn't allow Apple to incorporate the above features into iOS Maps while Android had them, putting iOS at a severe competitive disadvantage.

Link? (Or I assume it is speculation.)

No, it's pretty well known that google would not allow them to incorporate turn by turn as long as they were using googles maps. I'm guessing apple would have liked a short extension of the agreement while they worked on their maps and google probably wouldn't budge on a long term deal. So apple was forced to go to market with a subpar offering.

That doesn't seem to make sense from Google's standpoint. Why wouldn't Google want iOS users to use Google maps? The consumer data would be worth boatloads to Google.

Yup, while the Apple fans can believe that it was because Google refused to update Maps, I will, until presented evidence otherwise, that Apple refused to let Google update Maps because they've been working on their own version to roll out. Plus Jobs hated Google towards the end and this is part (IMO) of the thermonuclear war he declared.Given how Google operates, I don't believe they just told Apple to go suck it and be happy with Maps as they were. If they could have upgraded it, I fully expect that they would have. Android has other competitive advantages, they didn't need to hold Maps ransom.

You're right. What I've read is that Google wanted two things in the re-licensing (which would have included turn-by-turn) which were unacceptable to Apple: inclusion of the Lattitude features and greater "Google" branding.

 

[goonsquad]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

Obviously BOTH companies found the other's terms to be unreasonable.. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is that Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (at a price that Apple was willing to pay). I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be trying to assign blame for a mistake when it is way too early to even say if a mistake was even made. At this point, all we have is click fodder for tech bloggers and some very vocal nerd rage. Yet Apple is selling the iPhone 5 faster than they can make them, breaking all previous launch records in the process. iOS 6 adoption rates are as strong as expected and satisfaction rates are nearly as high as they were for iOS 5. This is very similar to the Flash "mistake" that tech pundits and nerds raged about yet ultimately worked out great for Apple. It is a calculated risk that stands to have a large payoff in the long run.

 

[Maelstrom]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

Obviously BOTH companies found the other's terms to be unreasonable.. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is that Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (at a price that Apple was willing to pay). I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be trying to assign blame for a mistake when it is way too early to even say if a mistake was even made. At this point, all we have is click fodder for tech bloggers and some very vocal nerd rage. Yet Apple is selling the iPhone 5 faster than they can make them, breaking all previous launch records in the process. iOS 6 adoption rates are as strong as expected and satisfaction rates are nearly as high as they were for iOS 5. This is very similar to the Flash "mistake" that tech pundits and nerds raged about yet ultimately worked out great for Apple. It is a calculated risk that stands to have a large payoff in the long run.

It is a mistake because it has already been apologized for by Tim Cook himself. It may work out, but that doesn't mean releasing Maps in the state Apple released it in wasn't a mistake as well. Both things can be true.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

Obviously BOTH companies found the other's terms to be unreasonable.. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is that Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (at a price that Apple was willing to pay). I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be trying to assign blame for a mistake when it is way too early to even say if a mistake was even made. At this point, all we have is click fodder for tech bloggers and some very vocal nerd rage. Yet Apple is selling the iPhone 5 faster than they can make them, breaking all previous launch records in the process. iOS 6 adoption rates are as strong as expected and satisfaction rates are nearly as high as they were for iOS 5. This is very similar to the Flash "mistake" that tech pundits and nerds raged about yet ultimately worked out great for Apple. It is a calculated risk that stands to have a large payoff in the long run.

I hope it's not nearly as bad as the Flash mistake. I'm buying i5's for me and my wife tomorrow, and will be thoroughly pissed if I have to suffer through years of an inferior maps product like iPhone users suffered by not having access to flash for years.

 

[adonis]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

Obviously BOTH companies found the other's terms to be unreasonable.. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is that Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (at a price that Apple was willing to pay). I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be trying to assign blame for a mistake when it is way too early to even say if a mistake was even made. At this point, all we have is click fodder for tech bloggers and some very vocal nerd rage. Yet Apple is selling the iPhone 5 faster than they can make them, breaking all previous launch records in the process. iOS 6 adoption rates are as strong as expected and satisfaction rates are nearly as high as they were for iOS 5. This is very similar to the Flash "mistake" that tech pundits and nerds raged about yet ultimately worked out great for Apple. It is a calculated risk that stands to have a large payoff in the long run.

I hope it's not nearly as bad as the Flash mistake. I'm buying i5's for me and my wife tomorrow, and will be thoroughly pissed if I have to suffer through years of an inferior maps product like iPhone users suffered by not having access to flash for years.

I've used Maps every day since release day without a problem yet.Turn by turn directions, using Siri to "Give me directions to XXXX", works great. Better App than google maps, at least for me. Results may vary.

 

[goonsquad]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

Obviously BOTH companies found the other's terms to be unreasonable.. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is that Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (at a price that Apple was willing to pay). I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be trying to assign blame for a mistake when it is way too early to even say if a mistake was even made. At this point, all we have is click fodder for tech bloggers and some very vocal nerd rage. Yet Apple is selling the iPhone 5 faster than they can make them, breaking all previous launch records in the process. iOS 6 adoption rates are as strong as expected and satisfaction rates are nearly as high as they were for iOS 5. This is very similar to the Flash "mistake" that tech pundits and nerds raged about yet ultimately worked out great for Apple. It is a calculated risk that stands to have a large payoff in the long run.

I hope it's not nearly as bad as the Flash mistake. I'm buying i5's for me and my wife tomorrow, and will be thoroughly pissed if I have to suffer through years of an inferior maps product like iPhone users suffered by not having access to flash for years.

There is still no Flash on the iPhone. Maybe you'd be better off with a Samesung.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Then why did apple not have turn by turn while everyone else did?

I have no idea whose terms where unreasonable, Google or Apple's. I just don't think we have enough info to say "Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn" and that's it.

Obviously BOTH companies found the other's terms to be unreasonable.. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is that Google wouldn't allow turn-by-turn on iOS (at a price that Apple was willing to pay). I think the problem here is that everyone seems to be trying to assign blame for a mistake when it is way too early to even say if a mistake was even made. At this point, all we have is click fodder for tech bloggers and some very vocal nerd rage. Yet Apple is selling the iPhone 5 faster than they can make them, breaking all previous launch records in the process. iOS 6 adoption rates are as strong as expected and satisfaction rates are nearly as high as they were for iOS 5. This is very similar to the Flash "mistake" that tech pundits and nerds raged about yet ultimately worked out great for Apple. It is a calculated risk that stands to have a large payoff in the long run.

I hope it's not nearly as bad as the Flash mistake. I'm buying i5's for me and my wife tomorrow, and will be thoroughly pissed if I have to suffer through years of an inferior maps product like iPhone users suffered by not having access to flash for years.

There is still no Flash on the iPhone. Maybe you'd be better off with a Samesung.

Not having flash isn't a big issue now. It was 3 years ago when the web was dominated by flash.