Apple Maps up to five times more data efficient than Google Maps

http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/10/01/apple-maps-up-to-five-times-more-data-efficient-than-google-maps/

by iPhone1 • 14 years ago

31 40 14 years ago

highwind• 14 years ago

Can anyone compare this to the Google Maps on Android? Downloading vector based map will obviously use less data than raster map image (different one at different zoom level nonetheless). I don't see how this is much of a news.

ghshephard3• 14 years ago

It's news to anyone with an iPhone that has to pay for their data when downloading maps @ $0.15/megabyte when traveling internationally. I've racked up $20-$30 just using the maps application on a single trip, so this is positive news for me.

ftwinnovations• 14 years ago

Apple maps has caused me plenty of headaches so far, but hearing this definitely pleases me. I remember traveling lost in Beijing and just ripping through my AT&T international data plan using maps to get back to my hotel.

Sure, with Apple maps I won't even find my hotel, but at least I'll do it five times more efficiently!

ghshephard3• 14 years ago

The reports that I've seen suggest Apple has better map tile/POI detail in China than Google does. China is one of the places that Apple comes out ahead of Google in terms of Map Data Quality.

mtgx• 14 years ago

The title is a little misleading. It may be more efficient compared to the 5 years old Google Maps app on iOS, but Google Maps for Android has been vector based since December 16th, 2010, when they launched Google Maps 5.0.

http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2010/12/under-hood-of-googl...

Also don't forget Apple's Maps retrieve a lot less data than Google Maps, since they don't actually have that data. Google Maps offers a lot more information.

jonursenbach2• 14 years ago

The title isn't misleading because the test has nothing to do with Android. They're comparing the two iOS map offerings, not cross-platform.

recoiledsnake• 14 years ago

How would you infer that from the title? Bandwidth used by apps can and is frequently constant across platforms.

Won't adding a "on iOS" at the end help clarify things?

taligent3• 14 years ago

>Also don't forget Apple's Maps retrieve a lot less data than Google Maps, since they don't actually have that data. Google Maps offers a lot more information.

Well this is just stupidity at its finest.

A few extra POIs/streets would pale in comparison to the difference between vector and raster images.

mparlane2• 14 years ago

Clearly said in jest.

molmalo• 14 years ago

Also, compared to Android's app, it's also important to emphasize the ability to download map areas [1]. That way, you can download to your phone's cache the areas you will visit later, using a WiFi connection, so you can use the app without using your data plan or in areas without signal.

iOS's version of Maps was very incomplete compared to Android's version. Most probably, Apple was not very happy with Google about that.

[1] http://googleblog.blogspot.com.ar/2011/07/download-map-area-...

ghshephard3• 14 years ago

This would be an assessment over the application and the efficiency of using vectors - thought it is interesting to hear that the satellite maps show a win as well.

When I'm traveling internationally, and have roaming disabled, I use Google Maps in "Standard View" very cautiously - keenly aware of that $0.15/megabyte charge I'm racking up.

So, for those cities that do have decent road layouts, routing, and POI information - this actually is a nice little benefit.

jtchang• 14 years ago

Of course you use less data when you don't need to download anything important...like oh say, roads, important subway stations, or cities!

robert_nsu• 14 years ago

Yeah, I'd rather wait 5 minutes for correct information instead of waiting 2 minutes for incorrect information.

Timmy_C• 14 years ago

This is a false dichotomy. The data you're getting in iOS is not wholly incorrect. You're right that there are some big holes. But, in apps like foursquare, the speed gains are significant. Especially when you just need the map to find what your geo coordinates are.

ChrisLTD• 14 years ago

That's great, but I'm sure most people would rather spend more data in exchange for more accurate and complete maps.

Another thing to remember: with LTE larger maps wouldn't even take much longer to download.

capo4• 14 years ago

For the umpteenth time:

There was never a Google Maps app on the iPhone, there was an Apple app powered by Google's data.

The correct way of stating this is that Apple's iOS6 maps app is more data efficient than previous versions. As for the main reason the current app is more efficient is that it relies on vector graphics instead of image tiles, a technique Google have been using on Android for nearly 2 years: http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2010/12/under-hood-of-googl...

Another Android maps feature lets users select areas to cache offline, which I imagine saves even more data (it auto-caches frequented areas): http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2012/06/go-offline-with-g...

That feature is also worth mentioning for when Apple duplicates it and some people try to convince themselves that it was Apple's idea.

taligent3• 14 years ago

Calm down. Everyone is just calling it Google Maps out of simplicity.

And yes it is vector on Android which was rumored to be one of the reasons Apple even started on this whole maps adventure. Because Google wasn't willing to license the vector data to give Android a competitive advantage.

nwienert• 14 years ago

The title is still misleading, should read "old iOS Maps".

capo4• 14 years ago

I'm just a bit bothered by this phenomena of discovering features on the iPhone that were present on Android for ages and then attributing them to Apple: the notifications shade, voice input, voice actions, the ability to answer phone calls with canned texts, and now maps among many other things.

Many in the press keep omitting the fact that Android did it first, which I think is important in this climate where Apple is very litigious regarding this stuff and the press keeps touting their originality while simultaneously dismissing other innovators.

supercanuck• 14 years ago

I think is his point is that the onus for the lack of data efficiency is on Apple and not Google, which is what the conclusion I came to after reading the article.

but after reading you point, as a laymen, I have no idea what to believe.

esolyt• 14 years ago

>Calm down.

He is calm and pointing out a fact.

>Everyone is just calling it Google Maps out of simplicity.

No they aren't calling it Google Maps out of simplicity. Read the article:

"Apple Maps has been getting its share of negative attention since being released, but some new research shines a bright spot on the comparison between Apple’s and Google’s mapping apps."

"Results for the satellite view in Maps showed Apple’s app used about half of Google’s mapping application."

chaz• 14 years ago

Google Maps for Android has an offline cache, which is a huge advantage, especially for those traveling in subways without a data connection. Would love to see that show up on iOS.

lilc2• 14 years ago

I find it ironic that Apple is using RPC-encoded Google protocol buffers for communication in their Maps product.

sli• 14 years ago

I'd like to hear more about that. Care to elaborate?

lilc2• 14 years ago

During the last XCode beta, I was playing around with the iPhone simulator and using a proxy I saw the server would respond to geocoding requests with an 'application/x-protobuf' header. That header has since been removed, but the data is still encoded the same (comparing the same request before and after). I was going to try to figure out the RPC encoding method Apple's using, but I lost motivation after reading that they are rate-limiting the API, making it less useful to me.

DigitalSea• 14 years ago

I guess, it's a lot easier to be data efficient... When you have next to no map data to retrieve in the first place. I am tired of hearing about Apple's Maps, whether it's good or bad, everyone can agree (even Apple themselves agree) that the maps application is sub-par and finding nice things to say about it doesn't change the fact that if you want to get somewhere the new Apple Maps can only promise to get you within 80km of the location you want to be in (if you're lucky), not to mention the missing landmarks, weird black and white colouring of some areas and missing roads.

Let's not detract away from the real problem here. Lets see if Apple Maps are as data efficient in 5 years when they catch up to half the level that Google Maps are currently at provided they work day and night to get to that stage.

zarify2• 14 years ago

No, but I'm sure we _can_ all agree that map quality and POI quantity/accuracy will vary significantly by area.

Let's not detract from the real problem here: the lack of sea monsters and other mythical beasts in all smartphone mapping offerings (sure Google included them in their 8 bit maps, but they tried to pass that off as a joke).

mapgrep• 14 years ago

Customer: It's not much of a cheese shop, is it?

Owner: Finest in the district!

Customer: (annoyed) Explain the logic underlying that conclusion, please.

Owner: Well, it's so clean, sir!

Customer: It's certainly uncontaminated by cheese....

http://www.minderella.com/words/cheeseshop.htm

lurkinggrue• 14 years ago

In other news: Apple Maps missing 5 times the data that Google offers.

Apple Maps up to five times more data efficient than Google Maps

Related Stories