IT WAS one of the biggest tech headlines of the year: in September, Apple dropped its contract with Google, which had always supplied the data for the iPhone's Maps app. For various strategic reasons, Apple preferred to write a new app, based on a new database of the world that Apple intended to assemble itself.
As everybody knows by now, Apple got lost along the way. It was like a 22-car pileup. Timothy Cook, Apple's chief executive, made a quick turn, publicly apologising, firing the executive responsible and vowing to fix Maps. For a company that prides itself on flawless execution, it was quite a detour. Rumours swirled that Google would create an iPhone app of its own, one that would use its 7-year-old, far more polished database of the world.
That was true. Today, Google Maps for the iPhone has arrived. It's free, fast and fantastic.
Now, there are two parts to a great maps app. There's the app itself — how it looks, how it works, what the features are. In this regard, few people complain about Apple's Maps app; it's beautiful, and its navigation mode for drivers is clear, uncluttered and distraction-free.
But then there's the hard part: the underlying data. Apple and Google have each constructed staggeringly complex databases of the world and its roads. The recipe for both companies includes map data from TomTom, satellite photography from a different source, real-time traffic data from others, restaurant and store listings from still more sources, and so on. In the end, Apple says that it incorporated data from at least 24 different sources.
Those sources always include errors, if only because the world constantly changes. Worse, those sources sometimes disagree with one another. It takes years to fix the problems.
So the first great thing about Google's new Maps is the underlying data. Hundreds of Google employees have spent years hand-editing the maps, fixing the thousands of errors that people report every day. (In the new app, you report a mistake just by shaking the phone.) And since 2006, Google's Street View vehicles have trawled 3,000 cities, photographing and confirming the cartographical accuracy of 5 million miles of roads. You can sense the new app's polish and intelligence the minute you enter your first address; it's infinitely more understanding. When I type "200 W 79, NYC," Google Maps drops a pin right where it belongs: on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.
Apple's Maps app, on the other hand, acts positively drunk. It asks me to clarify: "Did you mean 200 Durham Road, Madison, CT? Or 200 Madison Road, Durham, CT?"
And then there's the navigation. Lots of iPhone owners report that they've had no problem with Apple's driving instructions, and that's great. But I've been idiotically misdirected a few times — and the trouble is, you never know in advance. You wind up with a deep mistrust of the app that's hard to shake. Google's directions weren't great in the app's early days either, and they're still not always perfect. But after years of polishing and corrections, they're right a lot more often.
The must-have features are all here: spoken driving directions, colour-coded real-time traffic conditions, vector-based maps (smooth at any size). But the new app also offers some incredibly powerful, useful features that Apple's app lacks.
Street View, of course, lets you see a photograph of a place, and even "walk" down the street in any direction. Great for checking out a neighbourhood before you go, scoping out the parking situation or playing "you are there" when you read a news article.
Along with driving directions, Google Maps gives equal emphasis to walking directions and public transportation options.
This feature is brilliantly done. Google Maps displays a clean, step-by-step timeline of your entire public transportation adventure. If you ask for a