I am one of those people. I refuse to upgrade to iOS6 presently on my iPad2.
This was initially because of the maps degradation, but now I also don't see any reason to actually undertake the upgrade, apart from removing the little notification counter on the setting icon that for some reason I find annoying.
That's true, although it seems like a lot of those apps might not use MapKit in a way where its use is a problem, right? Apple's maps probably works okay if you already know where you're trying to go. It's location and directions and such that are the problem.
That would require the developer to rebuild their app with the Google map in there instead of (or as well as) MapKit which, will possible, seems unlikely for most apps.
Why? Shouldn't this be a benefit to using Android? I just ditched my iPhone for an Android phone and Apple Maps was a major reason why I didn't go for the iPhone 5. Now that I've owned an Android phone, I couldn't be happier and more impressed with the device.
Because Google wants you to use their services (and see their ads).
Google’s goal with Android is to prevent losing control over mobile platforms. Imagine a world in which Apple and Microsoft are the only two mobile OS vendors and then both decide to make the default search engine in their browsers Bing or something. Google wants to prevent that.
At the moment there is about zero danger of Apple gaining any kind of significant control over mobile platforms that would allow them to do anything like that. It’s not going to happen – and there isn’t even any indication that Apple wants to make it happen. (Even if it were to happen it’s easy enough for Google to pull all their apps.)
Maybe Google’s Android division also has plans to more directly make some money with Android, but I doubt it. Even if they had, though, I doubt that is in any sense a company-wide policy. Their goal is to get the most users to use their services. The maps people want everyone to use their maps, no matter which device they own. If it is possible to easily grab a few million users on Apple devices Google will obviously jump for that.
Because Google wants you to use their services (and see their ads).
Sure, but they also want to increase Android's share of the high end of the market and they could also have just let the inferior maps in iOS6 continue to drive prospective iPhone 5 buyers to Android.
But obviously they've weighed their options here and decided that having a presence on iOS is worth more than letting Apple continue to piss off users by hobbling along on its own.
As far as I know, right now Google's revenue is coming from ads and not from Android. Exclusivity of apps could potentially help the Android market grow over time. But is Google directly benefiting from this? I think that a larger Android market is just reducing the risks of Google tools/revenue generating apps/services being kicked out of environments that Google doesn't "control". Next question would be: would users of these other platform allow this to happen?
As a side comment, I don't think app exclusivity as user acquisition technique is working anymore. It's an important aspect, but it's part of a larger picture.
I don't think it's obvious whether or not having Google apps on iOS helps or hurts Android market share overall.
On the one hand, you have people who might otherwise switch to Android to get particular features of the Google ecosystem they want. On the other, you have iOS users who gradually become more invested in the Google ecosystem over time and eventually decide to switch to Android to get "the real thing".
> > Because Google wants you to use their services (and see their ads).
> Sure, but they also want to increase Android's share of the high end of the market and they could also have just let the inferior maps in iOS6 continue to drive prospective iPhone 5 buyers to Android.
As useful as maps are to many, and essential to some, there are an awful lot of people for who it is not a descision making difference when speccing up a phone. For them it is a very useful extra on which-ever phone they buy for other reasons.
So for all the noise about how bad Apple's maps are in this itteration I don't think it'll massively affect who buys what in the high-end market on its own, but if Google's maps on iOS6 are significantly better than Apple's maps on iOS6 it is an embarrasment to Apple and it helps cement an idea of qualty in Google's output. That may help sales of high-end Android devices because one of the common reasons for going Apple is the perception (earned in some ways) that Android is a lot less polished nd smooth-working than iOS - having a product on that platform that outperforms the built-in competitor will help fight that automatic perception and perhaps encourge peopel to at least look into the competition when chosing their upgrade/replacement path later on.
tl;dr: it is more about showmanship than any direct sales effect (and if the have most of the code done anyway, it'll not cost them an awful lot to get it tweaked and up on the AppStore).
> Why? Shouldn't this be a benefit to using Android?
Google makes its money from data/advertising - Android is a hedge to prevent a single dominant player from controlling the flow of data.
In itself, Android isn't necessarily profitable for Google - but it opens the door to their services ecosystem which is profitable.
Not taking advantage of Apple's Maps gaffe would be ignoring a massive chunk of the data pie. And with Nokia hitting the scene with their map services, Google needs to act fast.
Google makes money whether a user is on Android or iOS - as long as they're using Google services. Android team may not be pleased but it is in Google's best interest to serve as many platforms/users as possible.
Amazon sells a lot of Kindle books that are read with the iOS application. Amazon hasn't sold any books on the iOS application for over a year (and, arguably, never has because even before the IAP controversy the Kindle app buy button sent you to Amazon's website in Safari).
Amazon doesn't sell Kindles in their iOS app to avoid the in-app purchase cut to Apple. The app doesn't even have a link to Amazon's site since that's forbidden by Apple's terms.
But yes, they make money indirectly from customers like me who visit their website to buy books so we can read on our iOS devices.
Google benefit the most when the most number of people use their software services, so making their maps multi-platform is in their best business interest.
If that's true, the decision to remove the stagnant Google powered Maps was the best decision. Now, if Google releases a mapping app, it will have to include turn-by-turn navigation and better overall experience.
But since it can never be set as the default mapping app it will always be a sub-par experience. What happens when you open your contacts and want to map your contacts address? Or when you are using any other app and want to map an included address?
Once the users that have been clamoring for Google Maps realize this problem there will probably be some pressure on Apple to come out with customizable defaults for something like Maps. I kind of doubt they would ever copy a fully flexible system like Android's Intents, but I could see them allowing some limited choices for a few tasks. Though probably not for mapping since they seem to think that is strategic for them.
Twitter and Facebook where 3rd party apps once. Now they have hooks to integrate into the system (for the "share" buttons). There's no reason this can't be done with maps too.
The speculation by many is that Google didn't allow Apple to have certain features. Why else would Apple rush their maps app out if it wasn't because they needed to? Why would they willingly let one of the biggest apps on the phone stagnate?
> The speculation by many is that Google didn't allow Apple to have certain features.
Or that Google would have required Apple to make unacceptable concessions in order to get access to newer features. My personal guess (no strong basis, just a gut feeling) is that Google would have required Apple to include location-based ads in the updated Maps, as well as integrating with other Google location-based services (e.g, Latitude), even where that conflicted with Apple services (e.g, Find My Friends [1]).
I remember reading that Google wanted more Google branding. The way Apple wanted to go was make it an Apple product supported by Google. Google wanted it to be a Google product integrated into Apple. Apple wasn't having it and took this route.
There was some talk about it having to do with the valuable location data that Apple didn't want Google to collect, or maybe it was the other way around.
Google Maps saved my hide several times when I was staying in Saigon. The cab drivers can't find their way around District 7 even when they aren't trying to take the long route.
