| HN Mirror

https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/

I will go back and try Apple maps from time to time.

It will just do crazy stuff. Ask for something and want you to drive, literally, to something 300 miles away. It is easily confused when you use something by it's name.

But trying to use Apple Maps on holiday in Europe was almost useless.

Then so many other things. Google Maps will tell you if the place will be open or closed when you will get there for example.

Apple use to stand for providing the best products. The best user experience. Somehow that has been lost and become acceptable to do a poor job.

Same with Siri. It is just an awful user experience compared to using the Google Assistant.

Guess my question is why is this acceptable? Look at their privacy agreement and you approve them collecting all kinds of data so that is not it. Heck Apple even forces you to accept them collecting data on people you interact with in the US.

"When you share your content with family and friends using Apple products, send gift certificates and products, or invite others to participate in Apple services or forums, Apple may collect the information you provide about those people such as name, mailing address, email address, and phone number. Apple will use such information to fulfill your requests, provide the relevant product or service, or for anti-fraud purposes."

I am tired of Apple getting a pass on offering a poor user experience. What they use to be all about.

Accacin 2950 days ago

Trying to use Google Maps in Japan was useless, using the buses in Kyoto it wouldn't tell me what stop I'm at, etc. Apple maps could tell me exactly what stop I was at whereas Google Maps was lacking in information.

Also, with regards to the blog link, why would you care about how detailed the buildings on the map are for daily use? And Google will tell me if something will be closed by the time I get there. But it's usually wrong for me.

It is the same when on holiday in Europe. Disappointing Apple does not do something about it and ok with having a product with a worse UX than competitors.

I remember when Apple approach was to be the best.

lumisota 2950 days ago

Apple provides similar tooling for businesses [0].

[0]: https://mapsconnect.apple.com

Angostura 2950 days ago

> The big difference I see now days comes down to how quickly the data is updated.

To be fair to Apple, tehy are very responsive if you report. I quite often use the in-Map tool for reporting a problem with a location and these days get a 'Its been fixed' within a few days or a week.

In the end it is about user experience and Apple has failed to provide a competitive user experience with Apple Maps and Siri for that matter. To be that is not excusable.

It has now been long enough for them to get it better and worries me that it is just now acceptable at Apple.

What rot. Google have a 7 year head start on Apple in terms of mapping. To expect Apple to offer a service at a similar standard immediately is preposterous! Besides, Apple can pinpoint my address, Google cant, despite being repeatedly told.

Siri is nowhere near as bad as you suggest. You are exaggerating to make a point.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/59309194b74af426208b5...

The issue is why is this acceptable by Apple?

Assistant is all about UX and the Apple of the past would do everything they could to be the best. I mean way better versus so far behind.

They have had plenty of time now to make Apple Maps better. Here is a great comparison.

https://www.justinobeirne.com/google-maps-moat/

Why is this acceptable?

How old is that chart?

> Apple of the past would do everything they could to be the best.

Sigh... Which Apple? Scott? Jobs I/Markkula? Sculley? Spindler? Amelio? Jobs II? You are aware that this all started before 2007? The Performa series, released under Spindlers watch, were arguably the lowest point in Apple's history. So let's not get too hyperbolic about the state of Siri, which is considerably better than you allude to. As to accuracy, Google links into the biggest search engine in the world, and Google seem to be ethically challenged when examining that data.

> They have had plenty of time now to make Apple Maps better. Here is a great comparison.

That is subjective. Objectively, Apples maps are significantly better than they were upon release 6 years ago. As I already pointed out, Google have a 7 year head start in an area that is neither parties core business, so good enough is all they need to be. Google Maps are useless to me as they cannot find my address. Apple maps can. For me, in and around London, Apple's maps have been objectively better than Googles. YMMV.

As to the article; building footprints make for better mapping? That's, like, your opinion man...

Problem is Apple keeps getting further and further behind Google and that just was not the way in the past.

They strived to provide the best UX.

It is very disappointing to see.

http://macdailynews.com/2018/02/22/apple-maps-vs-google-maps...

Angostura 2950 days ago

Alternatively

>“Relative to Google Maps, Apple Maps estimated trip times were on average 8% longer (i.e worse) and Waze estimates are 3% shorter (i.e. better),” Grabowski writes. “Using Apple Maps, I on average arrived 1% faster than initially estimated, versus 2% slower with Google Maps and 11% slower with Waze. In other words, Apple sandbags its estimates so that users on average arrive at the predicted time or slightly sooner. Google and Waze are overly optimistic in their predictions and thus their users arrive later than expected.”

Angostura 2950 days ago

I tend to disagree in that I use Apple Maps a lot when driving in the UK. Google is better in some respects, but not substantially. Siri is fine for what I use it for - playing music, setting timers, sending messages.

> It's still not quite up there with Google Map's location knowledge

Depends on where you are. Goole maps are surprisingly poor in parts of London.

So Google's maps aren't poor in London? Prove it. I can prove that they are poor in my area...