It would seem that the conclusion of this article can't be drawn from the quotes Schmidt gave.
"Reuters has softened the tone of its original report which is now disputed by Bloomberg. Bloomberg says that Schmidt declined to say whether Google submitted its Maps app for Apple approval. Instead it quotes him saying, "We haven’t done anything yet with Google Maps," adding that Apple would "have to approve it. It’s their choice." The updated Reuters piece now quotes the Google chairman saying that Google and Apple are in constant communication at "all kinds of levels," while appearing to say that the decision to remove Google Maps from iOS was Apple's alone." [0]
Of course, it's a classic PR move (and one that Apple has used quite frequently in the past) to brashly deny that you're building a product up until the day you release it.
Whether or not it's true, what's genius about Eric Schmidt's statement is that it puts the ball entirely in Apple's court for the maps fiasco. He makes it sound like Google was perfectly content to just let things keep working as they had been, and that it was Apple who unceremoniously ended things for no valid reason, where the truth was almost certainly more nuanced than that.
Agreed. The fact that some data is not on par with current Google offering doesn't make the product a bad one. Data issues can be quickly solved, specially when there are so many users to report problems.
For a maps application, the best report is just the location of the affected user. Any lookup on existing maps for that location will show what the problem is.
Eric Schmidt is very good at displacing responsibility and target other parties. It reminds me of when he said, "If You Have Something You Don't Want Anyone To Know, Maybe You Shouldn't Be Doing It". He is displacing responsibility from Google and targeting the public. He has a very passive-aggressive style and it's very affective.
The context on the 'maybe you shouldn't be doing it' quote is that Google is not going to disobey court orders to protect your privacy. It was never Google's responsibility. Please let's move on from this particular dead horse.
> The context on the 'maybe you shouldn't be doing it' quote is that Google is not going to disobey court orders to protect your privacy.
Though, Google complies with NSLs too, which are administrative subpoenas written by the feds and never seen by a judge, so let's not get all "court order" here.
Yes we know the context, and in quoting him it, it goes to support a passed history he has of passive-agression. Sorry you don't like it, but that doesn't mean it's not valid. In that case, Google was brushing responsibility for the 4th amendment and reporting them to the government, whether Google actually did have a responsibility is not really in question. The point is he redirected responsibility and targeted someone else. This similar to what he just did with Apple, dumping all responsibility for the maps issue in Apple's lap like Google 'did no wrong'. We don't know what actually happened but we know Google isn't as altruistic as some would want to believe and as Schmidt makes it sound.
Not because of that but because of the speculation that Google may have chosen not to renew the license for Google maps on the iPhone.
It could be a strategic decision to help Android, could've asked for much more licensing revenue, or refused key features like 3D, turn by turn etc. Maybe even demand G+ integration like the FB and Twitter integration.
Or it could be that Apple wanted to do Maps for strategic reasons. Or a combination of all of the above. But Schmidt's quote seem to put the ball in Apple's court.
Even if that's the case, I'm pretty sure Google wouldn't say no to a truck load of cash for a license, at least until Apple's Maps was more acceptable. Besides, why would Google want to discontinue GMaps on iOS, when GMaps on Android is much better?
And who do you think they are? Some kids on a playground getting their toys and leaving after one of them pooped in the sand?
We've done work with one of the largest media companies in the world who wanted to use Google maps in a traffic app. They could not get a deal done because Google would not commit to not placing ads on the maps. They were more then happy to pay for the map data but having 3rd party location ads were a non-starter.
So yes Google will say no to cash for the rights to their map data (though maybe not a "truck load") if they don't think the deal supports their business. Google's not in the maps business - they're in the ads business. I can very much see Google sticking their heels in the ground on a few "minor" points until Apple walked away.
The large media company you worked for is not in the same position as Apple. Apple has right now one of the most popular platforms ever created and the default search engine on their browser is Google Search, an engine that does serve ads and that I'm sure it brings a lot of revenue to Google. And it's not like there aren't alternatives to Google available. They could go with Bing, at least for devices activated in the US (Bing is pretty shitty internationally). I'm sure Google doesn't want that.
You cannot compare the leverage that Apple has over Google with any other company (although this works both ways, because Google's services are the best in their domain and any switch is likely to piss people off).
And really, I'm not blaming Apple for trying to set themselves free from third-party dependencies. I wouldn't blame them if they created their own search engine either - however considering their leverage and their resources, they should have waited until their Maps app was good enough.
GMaps on iOS was already far behind the Android version and they released a replacement that's worse than GMaps on iOS. At least if it offered something worthwhile over GMaps, like being capable of working offline. But alas, it is worse in every possible way, with some exceptions like some places in China where Google had difficulty acquiring data.
And I'm sure it will improve and be better in some ways than GMaps. But this version deployed right now is worse and they could have delayed it. It's not a strategy that can be said to be in the user's interests, which is a pity because that's one thing I always loved about Apple - the ability to say no to crap because user experience is more important than other gains they might have.
It's all about truckloads of cash. But I can easily see a situation where Google forecasted that trying to get a few percentage points of iPhone users to switch to Android was more profitable in the long term than the licensing revenue they would get from Apple or advertising revenues from a standalone app..
You miss that it takes two to play, both the truck to carry off the cash and the cash to put into the truck. I don't doubt for a minute that there is a number that Google would say "Sure, ship our maps." but I'm reasonably certain now that Apple was unwilling to pay that number.
Google loses nothing by having iPhone maps suck, rather it gains a bit of PR ("look we can do Maps better than Apple, ha ha poopey face") and since Maps are a really critical part of the mobile experience it might pick up a few points of market share.
1) Various facts with regard to AMaps quality (fit and finish) vs GMaps quality. Knowledge of licensing terms [1] and the fact that 2012 is 5 years after 2007 (introduction of the iPhone [2]).
2) Interviews with Google executives over the various Android lawsuits and tweets from Andy Rubin amongst others.
3) The "make money now" mantra that has swept through Google cancelling dozens of projects and creating pricing models for the ones that remain (AppEngine, Maps, Etc.)
So like any good investigator one looks at what is known, and what is not known, and trys to come up with a series of steps that would lead to the observed outcome (in this case crappy maps on the iPhone). You can classify those in the range from "more likely" to "less likely".
So for example a theory that "Google Maps are no longer on the iPhone because Apple forgot to renew their license." would seem improbable, putting together something as complex as the iPhone doesn't allow for 'forgetting' such things. A theory that "Apple couldn't get a license" also fails the sniff test as Google clearly licenses things to folks all the time, they have a revenue model for that and as a publicly traded company they generally don't "not take revenue" when its possible to do so effectively. So if you get to the point in your reasoning that Apple could get a license if they wanted to, and Google could give them that license if they wanted to. Then you are left looking at a failed negotiation. I've participated in both successful and unsuccessful negotiations like these, its like many things where the details or scale may be different but the basic steps share a lot of similarities.
That leaves us speculating on how the negotiations failed.
Given how badly the AMaps product (as shipped) is in comparison to the GMaps product, clearly Google was in a fairly strong negotiating position. Given Apple's free cash flow and assets (remember they made more profit last quarter than Google made in all revenue) they clearly could afford to pay a pretty arbitrary price. The simplest answer (which for me makes it the most likely) is that Apple was unwilling to meet the terms Google set for licensing.
So you (Tichy) have posed variations on this question to a number of people on a number of threads here but I've yet to see any reasoning you might have for why you don't believe this is the case. I realize it is implied by the snark but not actually expressed as a dissenting opinion. I'd love to hear your reasoning on it if you are free to share it. I note in a sister comment you mention 'revoke' the license, I don't think Google did any such thing, I believe the license expired and it was up for renewal, it was the renewal that failed to materialize.
[1] "Our license to include the YouTube app in iOS has ended, customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser and Google is working on a new YouTube app to be on the App Store," explains Apple in a brief statement to The Verge. -- http://www.maclife.com/article/news/apple_ios_youtube_licens...
[2] "iPhone also includes Google Maps, featuring Google’s groundbreaking maps service and iPhone’s amazing maps application, offering the best maps experience by far on any pocket device. Users can view maps, satellite images, traffic information and get directions, all from iPhone’s remarkable and easy-to-use touch interface. " -- https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/01/09Apple-Reinvents-t...
Well just as you posted that, Verge comes up with this article that proves you wrong. Apple had over one year left on Google Maps contract, but decided to ditch it anyway:
That is an interesting article. Let's pick it apart a bit shall we? I think it supports my conjecture but I'm only sharing my reasoning here, I don't have any skin in the game (I sold my Google stock a long time ago)
Quote 1: "Apple's decision to ship its own mapping system in the iPhone 5 and iOS 6 was made over a year before the company's agreement to use Google Maps expired, according to two independent sources familiar with the matter."
So per Tichy's comment it sounds like Apple says "Ok, we're going to do our own Maps product our agreement with Google expires in a year." If you think about the prep for the June event, and the release cycle for iOS, that puts the decision somewhere early this year right? They talk about this in June but they are deciding this in like the January/February time frame. So lets be generous and say Google's contract with them expires in sometime in 2013. (over a year but less than two years, from Jan/Feb 2012.) They are going to be shipping a new phone in October, they know it will be longer lived than a year, they need to decide this year. (point in my favor that this is brought on, in part by the renewal question). Is there any data point we can use to find out when exactly the license expires? I'm going to guess its the sometime just after the last day you can purchase an Apple device with iOS 5 and Google maps, or the just before they ship an update to iOS 5 which has Apple maps.
Why ship their own product? Quote 2: "Apple apparently felt that the older Google Maps-powered Maps in iOS were falling behind Android — particularly since they didn't have access to turn-by-turn navigation, which Google has shipped on Android phones for several years."
Don't know if this is The Verge talking or Apple of course, but would you agree that Apple was falling behind here? Do you think they even asked the question "What would it take to get the latest version of Maps?" No?
Quote #3 allegedly Eric Schmidt: ""what were we going to do, force them not to change their mind? It's their call."
So this seems to say that Apple could have gone to Google and re-licensed, Google was ready to respond and Apple chose not to. So this puts the decision completely in Apple's court right? Google is available, they have what Apple wants, and Apple decides not to go there.
Quote 4: "Interestingly, Apple either didn't know or didn't expect that consumers would find its new maps to be deficient — when iOS software VP Scott Forstall introduced the new mapping system in June, he called it "beautiful" and "gorgeous" and stressed that "we're doing all the cartography ourselves." The company was forced to adopt a different tone last week as complaints about the maps spread, saying the "new map service is a major initiative and we are just getting started with it." The company also promised "continuously improving" maps, and said that "the more people use it, the better it will get." "
I get that Steve is dead, but 99.99% of the people who ship product are still alive and at Apple. Does anyone believe that Apple really believed this product was competitive? Even slightly? Do you? I get that Scott has to say "It's beeeutiful" at the launch, he doesn't get to write the copy, but who dropped the ball here? Apple CorpCom? Scott? All of QA? Engineering? And when was that ball dropped?
Tech companies don't like paying 'product taxes' (what they call licensing fees to third parties on a per-unit basis), none of them do. But shipping crap isn't the answer and never has been. We talk about execution sometimes, that is the process by which a product is made and launched or a company is run, its how executives get measured. And Apple has been a gold standard here for years. And yet this product launch is about as notable as Roger Federer losing the final set in Wimbledon by double faulting every server for 6 games in a row. There are probably a half dozen different ways Apple could have transitioned to their own maps platform which would have resulted in their users seeing nothing but an improving map experience. That Apple was unable to pull that off in this context is unexplained.
So I don't think I was wrong, and I think The Verge has just proved that. If The Verge is accurate than by now Apple would have less, possibly much less, than a year left on their Maps contract with Google. Since they wouldn't ship without that resolved (otherwise they stop shipping product suddenly, that would be bad for them), the time frame is too short to wait for another iOS release, or the next iPhone refresh, Apple chose not to renew and shipped crap. That is all I've ever said about it.
You can claim, as Tichy does, that they just decided to 'kick Google off' and drop their user experience into the toilet and make themselves the butt of many jokes. There is no evidence to suggest (yet) that Google wasn't willing to re-license their use, which would have avoided that fate.
I don't believe they are so incompetent that they would have willfully shipped that maps product when they had an alternative. As Tichy said even Nokia or Bing would have been better, although given the history with Google I expect that the engineering effort would be minimal staying there.
Its an interesting thing to watch this sort of stuff. I've experienced it from the inside at Sun and at NetApp dealing with CIFS, from the outside a Microsoft/Novell networking customer, and now on my iPad with Apple/Google. The basic structure of these things doesn't change all that much.
"Google Maps VP Brian McClendon has also repeatedly said he's committed to offering Google Maps on all platforms, indicating that an iOS app will eventually appear."
"But if the old agreement between Apple and Google expired in the first half of 2013 (which, again, my own sources familiar with the matter agree to be the case), that means the deal was set to expire halfway through the expected year-long life cycle for iOS 6."
I'd be careful with that, Google can submit an App but it will only appear on iOS when Apple says it can. If you recall there was very long and protracted battle with Google Voice.
My reasoning is simple: everything Google does has the goal of collecting more data. Therefore they are interested in having maps on the iPhone. The iPhone being popular as it is, not collecting data from it's users is a huge black data hole. I think Apple already kicked the Google search as default (another thing that might factor into your sleuthing?)? If they were sure that Apple would always stick with Google search and maps, they wouldn't need Android (which they give away for free). They give away Android for free, so they are not really that interested in shipping lots of Android phones - it is the same to them if an Android phone ships or an iPhone with Google search and maps. Of course since Apple wants to get away from Google, Google needs Android to stay relevant in mobile search.
It's true, they probably won't give maps for free (I remember Nokia paid several billion dollars for their maps, so these things are not cheap), but I suspect ads on the device would have been sufficient (plus the data that comes with it - movement patterns as well as reactivity to ads). Why would they need more? iPhone users could always check Google Maps in the browser (ad supported), why would it cost more to show the maps in a nice app?
Do you actually think Google upped the price? Apple had announced quite a while ago that they want to kick Google maps, iirc. I can see why they are unhappy, they miss the data, the ad revenue and the freedom to add features at will. So it seems to me Google had all reasons to be content with the status quo, whereas Apple had all reasons to kick the maps. If they upped the price, how come Google Maps are still available on iOS 5? That must hurt Apple a lot, given that there are already millions of iOS 5 devices around. (I think GMaps are still available on iOS 5 because a friend of mine downgraded to iOS 5 to get the maps back).
I find it funny that you describe your approach as "what a good inspector would do". I think it is very easy to find arguments or data points to support something your want to believe. In my opinion a good inspector should always doubt everything. But you have me there - of course I can not prove anything either.
It's just funny how suddenly it is all Google's fault in the eye of the Apple fans. Naturally Apple can never go wrong, case closed. Apple has never shown any signs of hubris before.
Also, btw, while Apple is apparently richer than Google, I don't think Google needs cash that badly. What they need is data and a handhold on devices to secure their future. Obviously once Apple has established their own maps, Google maps are never coming back to the iPhone. So to gamble that away doesn't make sense at all.
And another point: what about Bing maps, or Nokia maps? Why didn't Apple partner with them if all they want is some good maps?
Maybe this will be clarified in time, for now people believe what they want to believe. I find it highly unlikely that Google would have revoked the maps license for the iPhone.
I think Apple already kicked Google search in earlier iterations of iOS? They simply want to get rid of Google stuff.
One thing of note is that none of the new feature points in iOS6 Maps are supported by the public Google Maps APIs. For Google to not allow the general public access to that data may be very well be the same reason that keeps them from not offering the data to Apple, whatever reason that may be.
But without that data, Apple's hands were tied to do anything new with the software. Starting new may have been the only way they saw to restore innovation to the application (or, at very least, catch up to the competition). Information accuracy aside, I find the new Maps app to be a vast improvement over the previous version.
It is all just conjecture at this point, of course, but I find it hard to believe that Apple would walk away if all of the terms were favourable just because it is Google.
Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt confirmed on Tuesday that his company has not submitted a mapping app of its own to Apple's App Store, though he didn't entirely rule out the idea.
Just because they haven't submitted one, doesn't mean they're not working on a new one.
This is a brilliant strategy on Google's part. Wait until enough people are unhappy, make them really miss Google, and then release it. Suddenly, it becomes the number 1 app in the app store and really puts egg on Apple's face.
I'm not sure you can call that "strategy" if a prerequisite is that your competitors customers are unhappy. :)
Apple's hubris (and a not inconsiderable amount of hype by the media, no doubt related to some PR misteps by Apple) gift wrapped this for Google. All they need to do is write an app.
But why would they do that? If they do release an app, Apple maps will be mostly on par someday, and Google will lose those Google Maps users. If they never release a Google Maps app, that'll make iOS a subpar platform when it comes to maps for some time, and will be an additional incentive for some people to switch to Android.
It could be Google's sweet revenge to the pain that Apple inflicts on the Android ecosystem. Google probably has some patents in that area is well...
Maybe, but recognize that that's the kind of hardball that got Apple in trouble here. Maps are just maps. A few people might switch to Android because of it, but not all that many.
The real value here is marketing: "Google has the best maps" is the message the public is getting. And the bit that Apple gift-wrapped is "iPhones have bad maps, use the Google ones".
You can't buy that kind of spin. In the space of a week the public perception on this issue went from "iOS is the best at everything" to "Android has better maps". It's not in Google's interests to rock that boat by picking a fight and making themselves look like the bad guy to existing iOS users.
Highly disagree. Maps are not just maps. It's one of the core solutions of the platform and I would argue one of the main reasons people buy smartphones over "dumb" phones.
Have you ever listened to someone complain about Blackberry's? For me, that conversation usually starts with "I can't use google maps on my Blackberry".
I have a blackberry, had a curve for many years, waiting to see what this year yields in the way of a replacement, but one of things that you can't criticize the blackberry for is maps. Google maps works just fine, showing directions, traffic and all the other good stuff. Even streetview works.
You can criticize the blackberry for its browser, but maps, keyboard, camera are still as good or superior to the competitors. The camera has fewer megapixels, but takes great photos, the keyboard is rock solid and better than any on-screen keyboard, but browsing sucks big time for sure.
Interesting. I've never heard this from someone with a Blackberry before. Whenever I ask someone with a Blackberry to give me directions (like when I'm driving for example) they usually just ask me to use my iPhone because it's easier. My understanding is that it largely has to do with the poor scrolling on a Blackberry as compared to the iPhone/Android app.
I had a trackball blackberry (Tour) for two years, and I was fairly satisfied with google's native Maps app [1]. While it doesn't include 3d navigation, it has routing, layers, transit, traffic, street view, and places -- just about everything the webapp provides. At the time (2010-2011) Google updated it every month or so with new features -- in that sense it was vastly superior to the iOS Maps app which google didn't control.
Exactly. I spent $50 just for a car dock for my phone because I could then use it for nav just like my old Nuvi (only waaay better). If the maps/nav sucked I never would have done that.
> Google probably has some patents in that area as well...
If Google wants to play hardball, then they will engage in a constant low-level of harassment against the 3rd party transit app providers, ensuring that urban populations will experience a lot of pain on iOS 6. In the meantime, there will be Android.
I wonder if Google hasn't already been implementing a Maps based strategy? I still have my original iPhone, and Google Maps is much better on iOS 3.1 than it is on iOS 5.1. For one thing, iOS 3 Maps never loses a set of directions in the middle of a trip. iOS 5.1 does that all the time. The iOS 3 maps is also more responsive on EDGE than the iOS 5 maps is on 3G.
Why would they do that? Presumably to attempt to prevent or delay Apple maps as a valid competitor. The Apple maps fiasco is high profile enough that I believe a Google Maps iOS app would take a noticeable share of iOS 6 users away from Apple maps. Also, Google presumably has traditionals ways of generating revenue from their maps (sponsored POIs, subtle ads in search results, etc.).
The strategy he was talking about was about what to do once Apple did something that made their customers unhappy, whether to release a fix immediately or wait. Many, many business strategies are built around a competitor making customers unhappy in some way.
Isn't that how many businesses are born? By solving a "problem" that people can't currently solve or not in an easy way, and giving them the solution for that?
Presumably this will also lead to a number of iOS to Android converts - it's not just about making Apple look bad, it's demonstrating on a large scale that "Android is better, see?".
I wonder how far Google would go for that, though. If they released a Google Maps iPhone app they'd have advertising and immense amounts of data on people's locations, search history, etc. etc.
That might be worth more to them than x% more Android users.
Yes, and while Google is waiting to release Apple is having to invest in their mapping app just to quash some of the bad PR all the while knowing that as soon as their app fixes most of the glaring defects Google can release a superior product and overshadow them. It will be interesting to see if Apple can close the gap in the places that matter.
If they did I wouldn't hesitate one second to buy it. I posted a comment on here recently about all the steps I had to go through just to try to get bus directions now with the Apple Maps app. Even if it worked the number of times I have to tap something else just to get to the directions is silly. And not well integrated at all. With google maps its just get directions, where from, where to, what type of transportation, and then the arrow button (go). With apple it's get directions, then choose bus, then where from, where to, go, wait for the App Store to open, find the routing app you've purchased in the list, tap route, hope that the app got the directions correctly from the maps app (this step I've never completed successfully). And finally get the directions.
It would be a fun day if that happens but it is highly unlikely. All of google products are either free or ad supported. Ads (or all the other forms of revinue) are in the DNA of maps and they are definately not going to change the whole maps platform for a paid ios version of maps. Either that or release a paid maps that also has ads, make no sense.
Having used Google Maps in android and apple's maps in iOS 6, I have to say that Apple is doing a pretty good job. The UI in android can be very frustrating (the layers metaphor can feel very clunky), and the navigation never, ever worked as well in android as it has in iOS (ymmv, of course). They certainly need to work on their POI database, but apple has made a fairly good first iteration. If Google released a maps app that is only as good as their android version I probably wouldn't bother downloading it.
And users for who Apple's app work good enough just forget about google maps, and the market for mobile maps benefits from the competition. Win-win for everyone.
Wouldn't it be a better strategy to release it straight away so Apple doesn't get to harvest as much data from users potentially making Apple Maps better?
If no one uses Apple Maps then there isn't much Apple can do to compete.
I'm disappointed. Ars is usually pretty good about these things but in this case it sounds like a techcrunch'y over-sensationalized headline as a result of over parsing some casual statements from Eric Schmidt. Not having submitted the app to Apple yet, doesn't mean google is not building one at all. It'll be crazy for google to let go of half their local queries from mobile. It's just not going to happen.
It could be a good strategy for Google to turn iOS people to Android. Why offer such a good competitive advantage to their competitors for free? If Android has top quality maps and iOS has poor quality maps, it may not sway a lot of people to go with Android, but it will surely sway some people to go with Android.
But google's strategy isn't about beating iOS. It's about creating as much engagement a possible on all its web platforms - search,mail, g+, ...
Android's purpose is to create leverage over all the phone manufacturers to provide a funnel into google services. And it's worked brilliantly, since over 50% of smartphones are now funnels into google services. (It's a nice OS too, I'm just describing the strategic reason behind it)
In that vein, you would think google is better served by capturing all the iOS eyeballs too. Google seems to think that way for other apps (mail, google+, etc) , and I think it's in their interest to do an ios maps too.
Maybe there's value for google in creating a little schadenfreude by delaying, but they have to be careful- if they do it too long, iOS users will have found other solutions (3rd party or apple maps will have improved enough).
Now might be a good opportunity for Nokia to release an iOS map app. They have their own nap tech and they could pitch it an introduction to Win Phones.
Now would be the best time for Google to release a Maps app. While people are still frustrated with Apple's. Apple will eventually (hopefully) improve their maps with time and then people won't care anymore. If Google wants to keep people using Google Maps, now would be a good time to release it.
The question is whether the maps war is more important to them than the android/ios war.
Even if they do as you say, the default maps app will eventually win. It's what'll be on the home screen for new iphone users, it's what will boot up when someone clicks an address in any other app (mail, contacts, etc). And Apple will improve it enough that the gap between the two isn't painful enough to bother with Google's maps app.
No, Apple will win the maps war on the iPhone, just as sure as MSFT would've won the browser war on the desktop if the DoJ didn't step in.
I can't believe the amount of positive reactions to this. Am I the only one who is reading something along the lines "Yeah, they don't want us, and we don't care. We won't do anything in hopes of people switching iOs for Android" in this?
We know Google is at least doing a similar stereophotogrammetry technique to dynamically render the world in 3D... they talked about it coming soon to iOS during their presentation in June, "The Next Dimension of Google Maps" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMBJ2Hu0NLw). Though upon rewatching, they might have just been talking about Google Earth.
No sign that they were porting over Navigation to iOS.
"We think it would have been better if [Apple] had kept ours. But what do I know? What were we going to do, force them not to change their mind? It's their call."
Yes, passive-aggressive douchebaggery was what this situation was missing.
(I'm not saying he's wrong; we don't know why the Maps contract negotiations broke down. I'm just saying he sounds like a jerk in this quote.)
How is it "passive-aggressive douchebaggery" for Schmidt to say that Google would have preferred if Apple stayed with their mapping solution, but Apple had a right to make their own decision?
Seems like a relatively straightforward statement about the situation in response to a reporter's question.
For anyone (else) dissatisfied with iOS6 there is a way to go back. It's more difficult if you're already upgraded to the latest iTunes version, but the process isn't impossible. You download the ipsw file for your hardware, backup the device, then put it in DFU mode, option-click restore, select the ipsw, then restore the backup you just made.
I am going to wait until 6.1 because I've had many other (than maps) problems. My company's wifi seems incompatible with the iOS6, it connects then immediately drops the connection. Reverting to iOS5 restores infinite wifi happiness. The slow, awkward to use app store is also best avoided until apple figure out how to make it faster and work properly. In the past I have been upgrading happily every time, but this time I really wish I'd waited. I haven't found a single useful 6 feature yet.
Does this still work today? I tried downgrading and got error 3194, which seems to indicate that Apple is no longer signing 5.1.1 (I hadn't jailbroken/saved shsh blobs yet). Am I SOL?
I tried to back up the shsh blob with TinyUmbrella a few days ago and it was already unable to sign anything older than the first 6.0 developer preview, so it's probably too late.
Why am i not seeing anyone talking about a google maps native app violating apple tos? Apple strictly enforces the "no replicatiion of native app functionality" rule, so even if google does submit an app to the app store, will apple accept it?
Smart move by Google. They'll gladly let Apple embarrass themselves with their maps and then provide much better alternative. There's no point to rush when they can enjoy current Apple map fiasco.
This is a mistake on Google's part. By not filling the void, they are giving Apple time to iron out the problems with their maps. If Google really thinks people are going to switch to Android because of the maps app they are delusional (there will be a few but not in any number that makes a difference).
Is it possible that google forced them to make their own maps solution? I assume apple made the first move, but given the size of the pissing match between the two of them, I could see google withdrawing map access in order to harm iOS.
If Apple wants Google Maps in the app store, they could make it a condition in their next round of default search engine negotiations. Apple has all the leverage.
"Reuters has softened the tone of its original report which is now disputed by Bloomberg. Bloomberg says that Schmidt declined to say whether Google submitted its Maps app for Apple approval. Instead it quotes him saying, "We haven’t done anything yet with Google Maps," adding that Apple would "have to approve it. It’s their choice." The updated Reuters piece now quotes the Google chairman saying that Google and Apple are in constant communication at "all kinds of levels," while appearing to say that the decision to remove Google Maps from iOS was Apple's alone." [0]
[0]: http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/25/3386598/google-maps-app-st...