The iPhone Topic

[Stevo985]

Had a play on a 5 on saturday. Friend of mine has one.

It's a lovely looking phone taken in isolation, but there's no denying it loks exactly like the 4. You don't even notice th ebigger screen at first. In fact my friend was using it for a while before I even noticed it was a new one (I think she wanted me to notice, haha!)

Anyway, the only new feature she seemed to be really impressed with was the panoramic photo mode. Which she was quickly gutted about when I told her my phone did that, and her old iphone would have odne that if she'd downloaded the app for it ("photosynth" if anyone's interested)

She loves it, but she's coming from an iPhone 3. Not 3G, or 3GS. 3. so anything is going to look impressive next to that as it had gotten so slow she'd probably have been quicker to write a letter to people than text them.

It's definitely lighter and faster, but from the short time I had it it seemed distinctly like the jump from 4 to 4s than the jump from 3G to 4, if that makes sense.

Again, it reaffirmed that I'd made the right decision in going for the S3.

[CVByrne]

I think tech media are hypocritical, the criticised Galaxy S and S2 for being light but praise the iphone 5. It's the double standards that is irritating when reading reviews.

Also I was using a 5 for about 10mins in the store and the thing that irritated me most was the back button being at the top of the screen. I mean now the screen it taller which looks a bit odd. It means reaching your thump up there all the time, it's daft.

The phone itself is nice, but I'd lose my mind using the software.

[MCU]

I love how not once during the keynote they say anything about the nano sim.

[CVByrne]

This is very interesting, Google Maps (and Youtube) on iOS was never written by Google, it was Apple writing the apps using Google SDK. So Apple chose to not add the new features like turn by turn etc.. that they could have added as they had full access to all parts of Google Maps via their 5 year deal. Also I forgot about Apple just not allowing Latitude or Google Voice on iOS for no reason other than they don't like Google.

[jim]

I thought there was an agreement with google that they could not include turn by turn.

[CVByrne]

Nope, Apples decision to not include turn by turn. Probably because it'd burn their sat nav app partners, apps that Apple made plenty of money from. Plus they knew they had their own maps coming along so didn't want to give users the feature from an app they were going to dump.

[CVByrne]

As usual, it's left to non US tech sites to give objective reviews of the iphone. So hats off to techradar for not making apologies for the flaws in the iphone 5. Their review was a refreshing read.

[Dodgyknees]

Had a play on a 5 on saturday. Friend of mine has one.

It's a lovely looking phone taken in isolation, but there's no denying it loks exactly like the 4. You don't even notice th ebigger screen at first. In fact my friend was using it for a while before I even noticed it was a new one (I think she wanted me to notice, haha!)

Anyway, the only new feature she seemed to be really impressed with was the panoramic photo mode. Which she was quickly gutted about when I told her my phone did that, and her old iphone would have odne that if she'd downloaded the app for it ("photosynth" if anyone's interested)

She loves it, but she's coming from an iPhone 3. Not 3G, or 3GS. 3. so anything is going to look impressive next to that as it had gotten so slow she'd probably have been quicker to write a letter to people than text them.

It's definitely lighter and faster, but from the short time I had it it seemed distinctly like the jump from 4 to 4s than the jump from 3G to 4, if that makes sense.

Again, it reaffirmed that I'd made the right decision in going for the S3.

Spot on.

Even to the point where my friend was desperate for me to see he had an Iphone 5 and he was impressed by panoramic too!

[Xela]

Had a play on a 5 on saturday. Friend of mine has one.

It's a lovely looking phone taken in isolation, but there's no denying it loks exactly like the 4. You don't even notice th ebigger screen at first. In fact my friend was using it for a while before I even noticed it was a new one (I think she wanted me to notice, haha!)

Anyway, the only new feature she seemed to be really impressed with was the panoramic photo mode. Which she was quickly gutted about when I told her my phone did that, and her old iphone would have odne that if she'd downloaded the app for it ("photosynth" if anyone's interested)

She loves it, but she's coming from an iPhone 3. Not 3G, or 3GS. 3. so anything is going to look impressive next to that as it had gotten so slow she'd probably have been quicker to write a letter to people than text them.

It's definitely lighter and faster, but from the short time I had it it seemed distinctly like the jump from 4 to 4s than the jump from 3G to 4, if that makes sense.

Again, it reaffirmed that I'd made the right decision in going for the S3.

I don't think there was a 3? It went from iPhone (the original) to 3G to 3GS?

I agree with the rest of your post. I had a play with an iPhone 5 at the Fort on Sunday and coming from a 3GS it would be a big upgrade in terms of spec (screen, camera etc). However, I had a play and its simply a case of 'more of the same'. I mean, its nice and everything, but the OS hasn't really evolved and it was a bit underwhelming.

Also had a play on the S3 and the One X and they were impressive.

Got some thinking to do! I'm in the market for a phone and tablet and I was convinced it would be the iPhone 5 and iPad. Now i'm not so sure. The Kindle Fire HD is drawing me in on the tablet front as well.

[The_Rev]

I dont see why anybody would want a Kindle Fire HD over an iPad or a Nexus 7. It's designed for people to spend money on Amazon with, and while that is probably okay in the USA where Amazon have an absolute shit ton of media for distribution, over here it makes no sense at all.

[blandy]

I read they did it because Google refused to let apple put turn by turn Nav google maps onto iOS so google could distribute more Androids. So apple waited till the 5 year contract was up and then came up with their own turn by turn Nav app and booted google maps off as a default app. You can still get google maps for it, but it still doesn't have turn by turn nav.

Where did you read that Blandy?

In some RSS feed.

It's also here

GMaps API TOS specifically forbids turn by turn. Section 10.2.(a).©.(i)

....Why doesn't the Google-backed Maps app on iOS 5 do realtime nav? Well, as Ars Technica pointed out in June, it's simply not allowed in the Google API license agreement for Maps. Easy enough for Google to provide the feature to its own operating system (once the underlying map data licensing hurdles were cleared when it turned over from NAVTEQ data to its own geobase in the late 2000s), but third parties? Nope. This was confirmed as a constraint when developers asked the question at WWDC several years ago. No realtime nav, no vector map tiles, no way.

But, surely, Google and Apple could make a deal to get around that pesky license? Given the special relationship between the two companies? Apparently not. As iMore notes and the Wall Street Journal delves into, Google was not willing to license turn-by-turn to Apple. Perhaps Apple drove too hard a bargain; perhaps Google's team wanted more access to user data, or to bundle the Latitude find-your-pals application into the mapping suite. Some suggest that Google wanted to keep turn-by-turn as a competitive tool for Android. But Charles Arthur's assertion in the Guardian that Apple "didn't want it" regarding realtime nav appears to be unfounded. Apple wanted it; Google wouldn't give it up.

Google's role as the mapping provider for iOS was never an easy fit from a corporate perspective, but it became downright untenable when the intransigence over turn-by-turn kept the iPhone's mapping capability a generation behind the Android front line. Navigation isn't a trivial feature; getting a solid app for your driving directions can cost real money, or require an ongoing subscription. Apple's users were getting the fuzzy end of the lollipop because Apple didn't own the technology -- and that's the horse driving the cart in this case, not the other way around. If Apple can't build products that include the features users want most, they won't be insanely great, they won't delight, and they won't sell.

That's the not-so-secret reason for the change to Apple's Maps. If iPhone users can't do turn-by-turn directions for free, Apple forecasted, at some point they would stop being iPhone users. Maybe that's a crass, commercial reason, but it's not politics; it's real features for real customers. And it's part and parcel with other Google-controlled or blocked features (voice search for Maps, requiring a Maps tile to show whenever the geocoder is used, high-quality vector Maps for Retina) that were dragging the platform behind.

None of that helps the current facts on the ground, as it were, when it comes to Maps in iOS 6, even if Apple should have leapt off long ago. In fact, users of pre-iPhone 4S devices may be extra peeved, as they don't even get the benefits of the turn-by-turn nav as they're sacrificing the data depth and accuracy of the Google infrastructure. This stuff is hard, and perhaps Apple's sin here is one of hubris -- thinking that the company had the smarts to solve several genuine problems at once, without realizing that the problems are actually that difficult....

[limpid]

You'd think that Apple would have learned from the Microsoft war and paid Google for a licence while they developed their own map-base. This is what they did with Microsoft; they made IE the default browser on MacOS while they finished Safari. Mind you, it took Steve coming back to finish that war.

[The_Lions_Roar]

Had a play on a 5 on saturday. Friend of mine has one.

It's a lovely looking phone taken in isolation, but there's no denying it loks exactly like the 4. You don't even notice th ebigger screen at first. In fact my friend was using it for a while before I even noticed it was a new one (I think she wanted me to notice, haha!)

Anyway, the only new feature she seemed to be really impressed with was the panoramic photo mode. Which she was quickly gutted about when I told her my phone did that, and her old iphone would have odne that if she'd downloaded the app for it ("photosynth" if anyone's interested)

She loves it, but she's coming from an iPhone 3. Not 3G, or 3GS. 3. so anything is going to look impressive next to that as it had gotten so slow she'd probably have been quicker to write a letter to people than text them.

It's definitely lighter and faster, but from the short time I had it it seemed distinctly like the jump from 4 to 4s than the jump from 3G to 4, if that makes sense.

Again, it reaffirmed that I'd made the right decision in going for the S3.

100% agree with this. My wife's brother has got one, although he's gone from the 3GS to the 5 so is a different look for him. But I kept winding him up on Saturday when my mrs got her phone out by saying is that the iPhone 5. She has the 4 and there really is little difference between them.

[blandy]

I think the implication is Google wouldn't and that Apple was hacked off with Google for mimicking the iPhone idea. The Google guy who was on the Apple board was in all the meetings for iPhone and iOs but was kept totally in the dark re iPad, hence why there's a bigger gap while others try to catch up with iPad. I don't know the reasoning, but that's what's said to be the case

here's a bit more on the license

...Google restricts those making apps from its APIs from offering real-time navigation or route guidance in their own apps. Here is the relevant section in the TOS:

10.2 Restrictions on the Types of Applications that You are Permitted to Build with the Maps API(s). Except as explicitly permitted in Section 8 (Licenses from Google to You) or the Maps APIs Documentation, you must not (nor may you permit anyone else to) do any of the following:

[…]

© No Navigation, Autonomous Vehicle Control, or Enterprise Applications. You must not use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with any of the following:

(i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device.

It looks like Google's terms for use of the API clearly restricts companies like Apple from offering turn-by-turn navigation in their apps. But this leaves at least one unanswered question: what if Apple and Google had worked out their own agreement that isn't necessarily subject to the TOS that are applied to everyone else?

Indeed, this remains a possibility—one that neither company was willing to confirm with us. When asked about whether Apple was specifically restricted from offering turn-by-turn navigation while using Google's mapping API, an Apple spokesperson declined to comment. Google did not respond to our requests for comment at all. As one of our commenters (name99) pointed out in a discussion thread on Monday: "Google and Apple are huge companies. Whatever deal they negotiated between themselves is going to remain secret. If you're hoping for Larry and Sergei to write a blog post explaining what Apple can and can't do, you'll be waiting a long time."

Indeed, we'll likely never know whether Apple and Google had worked out their own deal. And without that knowledge, we'll have to accept what we do know: that Google (at least) restricts most parties from offering some features based on its Maps APIs...

.

From my perspective, it seems maps is worse than google maps - like 5 years behind, or at least 5 years ago (ish) Google maps had similar errors etc.

Apple will no doubt fix the errors in time, but it's pretty poor to have something duff as a feature.

Like that article said, Google and Apple are mega businesses and they're mainly there to make money. Neither is "counter culture", or "rebel" or cool or whatever.

Apple sells expensive gizmos and Google sells your data. They both "work" most of the time in a way which is to the user of their goods satisfactory or better. Occasionally they mess up. They're also competitors with each other.

[CVByrne]

You'd think that Apple would have learned from the Microsoft war and paid Google for a licence while they developed their own map-base. This is what they did with Microsoft; they made IE the default browser on MacOS while they finished Safari. Mind you, it took Steve coming back to finish that war.

Exactly, Apple could have just payed Google a new 2 year licence for Maps while they perfected their own. It's down to the bitterness Apple has for Google, which is resulting in their customers suffering from a poor core feature of smartphones.

Hell Apple could have licensed Nokia maps if they really wanted to hurt Google but protect their users. It's Apple being both arrogant and petulant in equal measures.

[limpid]

Apple sells expensive gizmos and Google sells your data.

You may think it's a nit-picking, but Google do not sell your data. They sell targeted advertising based on your data. That's very different.

[blandy]

Poor phraseology on my part. They collect your data and use it to make themselves money. You get services, they get your data in exchange. I prefer a deal where the company I'm dealing with makes their money from something tangible - a product - and leave my data alone. Samsung, fine, Apple, fine.

I'm wary of data gatherers. Control is lost, with them.

[b23avfc]

Backed up everything. Now about to update the 4, then set up the 5. Updated the iPad 2 already, wasn't really a huge gain for that but hey. Not sure if i'm going to like the new maps tho. And until I get used to a youtube client or the app comes on (might already be I realise) then i'll have to get used to that.

The big deal will be when I got my iPhone 5 running. I do like the case the earpods come in.. i'm hoping my earphones fit in there

[darrenm]

I think the implication is Google wouldn't and that Apple was hacked off with Google for mimicking the iPhone idea.

That's implied by the site you linked. No-one else. No-one knows what deals were on the table between the two. I find it hard to believe that Google wouldn't let Apple license their maps for turn by turn, I also find it hard to believe that Google wouldn't have just offered to put turn by turn nav into a Google Maps app for iDevices. I don't know, neither does anyone else outside of the meetings.

Why would Apple be hacked off at Google? They didn't mimic the iPhone, they brought an evolutionary smartphone out (the G1) at the same time as everyone else was doing it. The Android stuff was around before iPhones and iOS so if anything it was the other way around. Don't let the rantings of some crazy salesman (Jobs) convince you that Android in any way copied iOS/iPhone.

The Google guy who was on the Apple board was in all the meetings for iPhone and iOs but was kept totally in the dark re iPad,

That would be Eric Schmidt. Who says he was kept in the dark about the iPad? How is that even possible?

hence why there's a bigger gap while others try to catch up with iPad. I don't know the reasoning, but that's what's said to be the case

No-one thought there was a tablet market. Everyone knew what Apple were doing, everyone just thought it was doomed to failure as no-one needs one. Still, a 10" tablet is too big to be portable and impractical as a laptop replacement so there shouldn't be a market. Everyone underestimated the power of mass immersion advertising and Apple have managed to be amazingly successful with something that Microsoft tried previously and gave up because it was a bad idea.

From my perspective, it seems maps is worse than google maps - like 5 years behind, or at least 5 years ago (ish) Google maps had similar errors etc.

It really didn't. I remember Google Maps very well 5 years ago. It was excellent then too. It just didn't have the extra bells and whistles such as public transport, cycle routes, traffic etc. that it does now. It never had cities in completely different places, a town called Airfield marked as an Airfield etc.

Apple will no doubt fix the errors in time, but it's pretty poor to have something duff as a feature.

Like that article said, Google and Apple are mega businesses and they're mainly there to make money. Neither is "counter culture", or "rebel" or cool or whatever.

Actually, Google are a bit different to most other capitalist organisations. You can't in any way lump them together with Apple. It's mainly because of Larry and Sergey. They're completely and utterly geeks who do things because they have a short attention span and love fiddling. Their whole company ethos is based around the same thing. Their employees are required to spend 20% of their working time on their own projects which may or may not be anything to do with Google. They open-source Android which, if you understand the APL and GPL, effectively stops Google from ever actually owning it or having a monopoly on it. There's no realistic way you can say there's any major ulterior motive to that. It's not 100% altruistic I'm sure, but they sure didn't have to.

[limpid]

Poor phraseology on my part. They collect your data and use it to make themselves money. You get services, they get your data in exchange. I prefer a deal where the company I'm dealing with makes their money from something tangible - a product - and leave my data alone. Samsung, fine, Apple, fine.

I'm wary of data gatherers. Control is lost, with them.

I'm happy with data gatherers who have a clear way of making money without selling data, especially when that data allows them to dramatically improve my user experience. Google fit this particularly well as they have no incentive to sell the data; in fact quite the opposite.

You won't like facebook at all - neither do I. I've removed it from my mobile devices as they clearly have no way to make money without selling my data.

Anyway, we're way off topic, sorry Applers.