Apple maps very disappointing

Dude, give up... You see that thing that says "level" under your name? You see it under their name? The higher it is, the harder the time you're gonna have convincing them that you're right or your point is even valid to argue. Just give up....

People jumped the wagon and updated to iOS 6, like usual. They weren't happy and they've complained here to Daddy Apple, he DGAF. Google is offering their maps mess and youtube has their app. People still aren't happy. When are people going to learn if you want to complain to Apple, you need to call them because no forum posts are read by Apple, no emails, nothing. And the very few that are, they don't pay you no mind nor do they answer you. You either love Apple and all it's products and support their every decision or you come here and complain and get attacked by the levels.

But anyway, man just give up. If Jesus Christ himself was standing behind Meg and the rest of her gang, they'd all call him a liar and not believe you were right.

people who understand technology beyond apple's distortion field participate in other forums where we don't have to follow apple's API to decide what to post, what to comment.

and the mods there are not children unlike here. So if you think you really have all the potential, I heartfully invite you to real tech forums to discuss tech issues in the complete reality, not just what appears so in the walled garden.

good day.

"Apple has never built a whole platform for free and then told developers they had to start paying if they want to keep using it"

read the changes going from Xcode 3.xx to Xcode 4. it exactly contradicts what you wrote.

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2776638?start=0&tstart=0

http://forums.macresource.com/read.php?1,1112722

So grow up and read a little more beyond what you hear from the corporation. Also, why are you so adamantly defending their 'policies' which clearly state they can be changed anytime, as seen above? You're just a user right? Or are you on some apple-forums-borg development program?

You have no idea what you are talking about nor what I am talking about. Apple briefly charged users $4.99 to download Xcode. I was talking about Apple's developer program that has always been $99 a year. (Well, not always. It used to be $500 a year.) That $99 gives a developer access to an online retail store with over 400 million customers.

Few developer strike it rich in the App Stores, but most recoup their $99 many times over. If a developer is successful and has a hit, Apple doesn't come back and demand more money. If a developer wants to publish a free app, Apple doesn't restrict restrict usage and lock out customers until the developer pays up.

Now, users are going to have to be careful about any map-based apps they buy. If they download one that is based on

Google's SDK, it could stop working one day because the developer couldn't afford to keep paying Google. Map-based apps that use Apple Maps won't have that risk.

you mean just like MS's skydrive updates have stopped because they're being forced to keep paying Apple over something which doesn't even concern apple?

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/81975

yeah, ONLY google would/does such things... I agree.. Apple is the start and end of everything. You're so fortunate to be a part of the glorious empire... please continue the daily worship.

"Apple is the start and end of everything"... "Glorious empire...", "daily worship"...

Please grow up.

You are talking about two completely different things. Apple hasn't changed any rules or license agreements. If Microsoft wants to use SkyDrive with iOS, it can do so. The only stipulation is that anything purchased through iOS must go through the App Store. That isn't new.

Sometimes Apple does make changes, however. Those changes apply to any new apps or updates. Existing apps can continue to work with the previous agreement. That is where Google is different. Google doesn't grandfather in old applications.

What you say is a huge leap of faith and naive, unless you represent Apple and are speaking on their behalf.

These two (Google and Apple) are are large, multinational, publicly listed corporations. They take decisions and operate based on what is in the interests of their shareholders. They will both do what is needed to protect the interests of their shareholders and will stretch the law to the maximum extent possible.

When we speak of whose Maps App is better, we speak about a product.

When we express opinions about their policies and "values", we speak rubbish - the reality is that they do not operate as you say and do not care much for your (or my) opinions on how they do, should or must operate.

It might make you feel better to think that all big corporations have the same ethics and business practices. They don't. Some companies, such as Apple, have notably higher standards of ethics and honesty than others.

That is why Apple struggles in big enterprise markets - it doesn't pay bribes so it doesn't get contracts. Apple sells product directly to customers. When Apple abandoned institutional sales and 3rd party retailers, its sales went through the roof.

Google, on the other hand, sells advertising to other companies. Google sells nothing to end users. End users, and their personal information, are the product Google is selling.

When talking of speaking rubbish - speak for yourself.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/10/12/advertising_identifier_how_to _stop_apple_s_ios6_from_tracking_your_activity.html

Apple is as interested in the ad business as Google is. That it has not succeeded on the same scale is a different matter.

Pretty sneaky isn't it? Collecting info for advertisers while consumers think that they have "notably higher standards of ethics and honesty than others."

No problem with your devotion to the brand. But that it makes you blind? Maybe because you sell it?

gkinchina wrote:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/10/12/advertising_identifier_how_to _stop_apple_s_ios6_from_tracking_your_activity.html

Here is a much better link: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4228

Apple is as interested in the ad business as Google is. That it has not succeeded on the same scale is a different matter.

Not even close. Google earns almost all of its money from ads. Apple runs iAd as a service to developers so they can earn money from free apps. Apple actually loses money on it.

Pretty sneaky isn't it? Collecting info for advertisers while consumers think that they have "notably higher standards of ethics and honesty than others."

Apple is leading the industry in promoting anonymous, but effective advertising. Apple deprecated use of UDIDs because they weren't private enough. At the same time, Google is getting fined by the courts for hacking people's web browsers to serve them ads even after they have asked not to be tracked.

Nope.

Google actions are public and debated. Because they are the industry leaders and monetize their consumer services in a public manner that is constantly under investigation by authorities to ensure fair practices. This is natural.

Apple is monetizing or hopes to monetise its consumer services and its network in a similar fashion. It is not yet large enough to merit significant investigation.

That's all there is to it.

Within their respective networks, they are both big brothers. No difference.

Bye for now- dont have too much time to engage in idiotic debates with people who do not have the authority or knowledge to speak on behalf of a company but still do anyway...

And quite silly to send me a link that tells me how to opt out of iAds etc. Google (and others as well) have similar opt outs. All of them do.

The point is that all of them opt me in WITHOUT my explicit permission.

Sneaky.

Very sneaky.

All of them.

gkinchina wrote:

Bye for now- dont have too much time to engage in idiotic debates with people who do not have the authority or knowledge to speak on behalf of a company but still do anyway...

Pretty full of yourself aren't you. I'll bet you're the piddle-in-the-punch at family gatherings too. This is the kind of stuff that negates anything valid points you may have made, oh holier than thou one.

So your point is ? That he is an Apple spokesman, actually represents the company and so I must take his comments seriously?

Or are you not making that point?