Maps might not be a great example. Apple was clearly banking on crowdsourcing to help with its inaccurate maps. They could have just released it as an optional app and fixed it over time, until it became mature and then replaced google maps with it. But it looks like they were caught with their pants down as the google maps contract renewel deadline was looming and they said "fuck it, launch with it, and we'll handle the PR of it sucking."
Maps is a great example of the difference because, wait for it, Apple never wanted to be in the mapping business. People are comparing Apple and Google and forgetting that the two companies ambitions are completely different.
Google wants the full vampire squid platter. It wants to be your phone OS, your browser, your desktop OS, your search company, your video site, your social network, your office software solution, your maps solution, your knowledge resource, your ISP, etc.
Apple never wanted to make a browser. Apple had to make a browser because the vampire squid company that led the market in browsers gave them a shitty one and used it to malign one of Apple's biggest products.
Similarly, Apple never even wanted to be in the Maps business. Apple had to get in the maps business on relatively short notice because the vampire squid company that led the maps market gave them a shitty one and used it to malign one of Apple's biggest products.
You can't compare the browser situation however many years ago and the Maps calamity. Google's app was hardly a "shitty" alternative, but as others have indicated the Apple response is mostly due to other reasons. How many iOS users rejoiced when Google Maps got rereleased?
It was Apple's Maps app which used Google-licensed data. Insofar as it was neglected, it was neglected because Apple neglected to improve it and declined to license additional uses of the data (like for turn-by-turn nav).
Or, as translated from Apple-spin-speak, according to the allthingsd story, Apple wanted to commoditize the Maps data, Google wanted more say over the app, including for it to be called "Google Maps", and feature things like Latitude and other features Android had.
In short, Apple wanted the maps data, but did not want it to be "Google Maps".
If it were really just about withholding features from iOS, why then are most major Android features on iOS, including Google Now, and including a version of the new Google Maps before Android even had it.
Sounds to me like Apple was pulling a John Boehner, refusing to compromise.
False equivalence fail. Apple spin would have been to blame Google the way parent had blamed Apple for everything. I simply noted both sides couldn't reach terms. Sheesh.
"If it were really just about withholding features from iOS, "
"You can't compare the browser situation however many years ago and the Maps calamity."
Actually I just did.
"Google's app was hardly a "shitty" alternative ... How many iOS users rejoiced when Google Maps got rereleased?"
'Rereleased' he says... you mean with turn-by-turn which was never there in the original app. Which is why the original was shitty compared to Maps for Android. QED.
