Google Should Make Apple Beg for Maps Navigation 46 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
When Google (GOOG) announced what is clearly the best car navigation application on any mobile Wednesday, it didn’t just take a swipe at GPS navigation companies such as Garmin (GRMN) and TomTom (TMOAF.PK). It took a swipe at Apple (AAPL).
Beyond the advanced features of the Google Maps Navigation app (voice search, crowdsourced traffic data, Street View navigation), what makes the app noteworthy is that it launched on Google’s own Android phones first rather than on the iPhone. By doing so, Google is putting Apple on notice that it is no longer reserving its best apps for the iPhone.
Navigation apps are a key category for mobile phones, and the iPhone is for once at a disadvantage here. Even the paid navigation apps in the iTunes store can’t compete because Google’s new navigation app is an extension (albeit a customized one) of its search engine. When a navigation app becomes an interface to Google’s massive search engine, it begins to deliver things that GPS app developers like Garmin and TomTom will never be able to build (search along a route, natural language search). Oh yeah, and did I mention it is free?
This is but the latest sign of a growing rift between Apple and Google. A couple years ago, when the iPhone first launched, Google and Apple had a strong partnership. At the time, Google CEO Eric Schmidt described the relationship as so close that it was akin to merging “without merging. Each company should do the absolutely best thing they can do every time.” Google supposedly didn’t need to create its own phone, because it could simply create software for the iPhone. And, in fact, some of the best apps on the iPhone—Mail, Maps, YouTube, Search—were developed by Google.
Only two years later, Apple and Google no longer have such a cozy relationship. A new Android phone is now launching every other week, it seems. Feeling the competitive threat, Apple started blocking Google apps such as Google Voice and Latitude from getting on the iPhone, and Schmidt stepped down from Apple’s board (although there were also other reasons for that having to do with antitrust scrutiny).
The tensions really came to a boil around the whole Google Voice saga. As we wrote at the time:
Multiple sources at Google tell us that in informal discussions with Apple over the last few months Apple expressed dismay at the number of core iPhone apps that are powered by Google. Search, maps, YouTube, and other key popular apps are powered by Google. Other than the browser, Apple has little else to call its own other than the core phone, contacts and calendar features.
So Apple starts to back away from letting Google take over the iPhone with all the best apps by rejecting them. And now we have Google’s response: a big middle finger. If Apple is going to make it hard to get on the iPhone, then Google will stop giving Apple its best apps first and use them to make its own Android platform more appealing.
Apple is in a terrible position here because the future of mobile apps are Web apps, and Google excels at making those. Apple needs Google, its most dangerous competitor in the mobile Web market, to keep building apps for the iPhone. Google would be foolish not to since the iPhone still has the largest reach of any modern Web phone. But it will no longer be a priority.
The sad thing is that Apple has been here before—with Microsoft. In the late 1990s, Apple had to beg Microsoft (MSFT) to keep building Office for Macs. Now it may be in the same position with Google. There may be more than 85,000 apps in the App Store, but it is only a handful which actually drive purchases. If Google Maps Navigation becomes one of those types of killer apps, Apple might need to do some begging first before Google goes through the effort to make it for the iPhone.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 46 comments:
Google will still be on the iphone as an app with navi or without but apple will have its own by default.
Google maps now have so many false info that it cannot be trusted. Go look for "Holloween Costumes on google maps and you get all sorts of shady residential addresses.The same applies of you look for a business. Just like google earth, there is no control as to who says what is where.
Google needs Apple more than Apple needs Google. How else will they know what to copy Apple with?
Acquisitions don't happen out of the blue, especially for a company like Apple, so this move, and Apple's reassuring forsight to stay ahead of the game by outflanking Google with its own purchase of a mapping solution, shows just how forward thinking Apple's management is.
Screw Google - Apple doesn't need them.
So it is just fiction that Garmin and TomTom are reporting lower earnings?
"Navigation apps are a key category for mobile phones, and the iPhone is for once at a disadvantage here."
So Symbian and Windows Mobile based phones are in no disadvantage because they have this category well covered?
"Other than the browser, Apple has little else to call its own other than the core phone, contacts and calendar features."
Are you being purposely disingenuous? What about iTunes, iPod? The iPhone
Google will remain a search company.
look at youtube... yes its popular. people use it. but does it make money.... hell no....
it justs uses a lot of digital storage space and server farms to keep it running.
Google will have to spend for more equipment
Apple knows maps and navigation are important.
plus Augmented reality.
On the other hand, Apple could develop their own mapping function (and with their recent purchase it sounds like they're doing just that).
Apple could also build their own search engine. They have the skills and the resources -- and would have a built-in audience of close to 100 million active users (counting the iPhones, Macs and iPod Touches) on day-one.
As an advertiser would I add Apple's search engine to my ad budget, knowing that it's reaching the most affluent and/or technically advanced 10 or 20% of the worlds consumers?
Apple is holding all the cards.
Apple's business has a good solid "moat" around it. iPhone and Mac users have invested hundreds or thousands of dollars in hardware, apps and accessories. We're not going anywhere any time soon. Google's users have only a URL to change.
The attack from VZ /GOOG has just begun with little guys like MSFT to join in and beat on the bully(in their eyes)
www.appleinsider.com/a...
So much for begging!
Google clearly stated that they will offer Apple to use this technology on the iPhone and repeatedly that they love the iPhone and that there is no tension between both companies. So: dream on.
Neither the Mail nor the YouTube nor the Maps application on the iPhone have been created by Google. They are Apple apps. You Tube and Maps (not called "Google Maps" for this very reason) do use Google's APIs. Google has nothing at all to do with the Mail application and if you look at Android... Google could not write a decent mail app if their life depended on it.
"Clearly the best navigation application"? You must be kidding. The most important little detail about navigation apps is the accuracy of the map data and Google Maps is awful; it lacks streets I am using since as many as four years and wants me to enter one-way streets in the wrong direction... it is clearly the best safety hazard, I give you that. Not everything that is free is automatically "the best". But you don't care for facts...uh?
The fanclub here, just want to hear to good news, nothing else. Does'nt matter whats true or not, just that the story puts down a couple of companies while shouting how great steve and apple are.
Perhaps the best thing to do would be to start a new site, Seeking Apple just for the apple fans?
every one has to deal with these annoying articles only written to get ad hits, most everything written by seeking alpha is crap including your fanboy opinion. I enjoy positive fact based articles not the inciteful dribble produced by the inane drones of seeking alpha like yourself
There was a reason they did it and it had nothing to do with benevolence, it was to avoid a trial over code theft that they were going to lose.
Apple won't need google mapping, they purchasing their own mapping company. One of Apple's core strengths is developing applications, you can count on their mapping software when it comes out being a doozie, user friendly, and fun.
That's not what this is.
This article says Apple is very dependent on Google's apps. It implies they could be withdrawn at any time, leaving Apple in a precarious position.
On the contrary. The iPhone is the only mobile platform generating any significant traffic for Google. Google Maps on the iPhone is actually an Apple app, using Google's open APIs. Google's new Turn-by-turn will be available on the iPhone as soon as Apple approves it.
So what's the story?
- Neither Mail, Maps, "YouTube," or "Search" were developed by Google. They were wholly developed in-house by Apple; some simply interface with Google services.
- Other than those cloud services and 93,000 third-party apps (148apps.biz), Apple has EVERYTHING about the iPhone platform to "call its own."
- As 93,000 third-party apps attest, "the future of mobile apps" is not solely or even particularly "Web apps."
- By virtue of the fact that Apple is--by a huge margin--the largest facilitator of mobile access to the Web, GOOGLE NEEDS APPLE to continue robust support of its (ad-supported) services
- Apple's position in 2009 is very different from its position in 1996-7: Its control of several markets plus $34 billion in cash (and no offsetting debt) says so...
- The existence of 93,000 third-party apps PER SE drives iPhone platform purchases--that huge base comforts potential buyers with the thought that they will certainly be able to find the functionality they need in the iPhone
Your article is complete nonsense. Shame on you.
>>>Anything Apple touches is a natural monopoly<<
So should we call the DOJ and Kroes? after all if its a monopoly it needs to be ..... Or perhaps you just pulled that comment out of your .....
On Oct 29 12:46 PM nexusil wrote:
> All the Google employees I know are huge Apple fans. Anything Apple
> touches is a natural monopoly where vertical integration and a proprietary
> system is clearly the most appropriate. Choice is overrated.
I did not even know what to do with it, until they set me up with music, etc. Now I own 2 I pods because it's always a fight who gets it, plus the iphone, and my next computer will be a mac.
I really do not see how other's can compete. I use a phone for it's phone and features, and GPS mapping, I would hardly use, but the APPS I use hourly.
#1. Google can turn off it's api's at any time - so it controls the apple apps (which are relatively simple to develop btw).
#2. Google is integrating streetview, which no other firm has right now. Not even the firm Apple bought. For all googles faults this is a wholly new capability.
#3. Google is multiplatform, and with Android will offer better integration over time.
#4. Google can afford to disrupt apple (and AT&T) and is doing so. It is doing so in maps. It is doing so in VOIP with google talk... It is doing so with Android, both in OS and through it's hardware partners. Apple can not disrupt google as Apple does not compete in Google's markets.
www.roughlydrafted.com.../
And as for the crazy suggestion above by pakalis that Google can turn off it's API's. Why one earth would they? They depend on Search and putting their stuff out to as many eyes as they can.
Google maps is okay to checkout stuff before you leave home/office or actually get on the go. Try driving on a highway at a relative speed and expect good uninterrupted 3g coverage, good luck!
Google has a lot of crapps, but Search and Gmail are the only that actually make a diference. All gathering data, and making Google Ads pay the bundle.
Earth, Wave, Finance, Documents, are just gadgets and experiments.
On Oct 29 10:42 AM scottg wrote:
> Your premise is that Google actually makes good applications? Besides
> search and maps, what are you talking about? Google Earth? Comes
> in handy if i'm hanging with Lewis & Clark.
>
> Google needs Apple more than Apple needs Google. How else will they
> know what to copy Apple with?
So how do you navigate if there is no 3G reception?
At the moment, Google Maps will navigate you out to the middle of nowhere and then stop working... No?
Cool "feature".
Tom-Tom's app actually installs map data on the iPhone. Google's approach relies on an active network connection (either 3G or WiFi).
Anyway, with 100,000 iPhone apps there are lots of different approaches to many, many functions. Google can disrupt all they want, they have nothing to lose. Unfortunately with Google's lousy track-record generating cash from their ideas/technologies, they probably have nothing to gain either.
(And right now there's no sign they want to do Apple any harm anyway.)
Also, I wouldn't write off Garmin...they make serious navigation devices specifically for: Autos, Motorcycles, Marine, Hiking, etc...much broader customer base than TomTom...and most are applications that would make a phone impractical.
I also think my third point escaped you. Like you I doubt that google will actually "turn off" the api's. What they will do, if they find that it's in their interest (i.e. Android starts to perform well and they find a good revenue stream in map search) is prioritize access. They can do this easily because they control the quality and nature of the api's (think microsoft's influence on java through the os). So if you think, over time, that iPhones are going to perform better on google services than Android phones, you're the one with the crazy suggestions.
On Oct 30 08:03 AM Jon T wrote:
> Schonfield has become a complete nutter.. Read this for the perfect
> analysis of Techcrunch's nonsense on this:-
>
> www.roughlydrafted.com.../
>
>
> And as for the crazy suggestion above by pakalis that Google can
> turn off it's API's. Why one earth would they? They depend on Search
> and putting their stuff out to as many eyes as they can.
> (And right now there's no sign they want to do Apple any harm anyway.)
No, ignoring everything else I wrote, still none at all...
October 29, 2009
Google Launches Music-Specific Search Result Pages
businessinsider.co...
"Users can now search either by band, song title, or even just parts of lyrics stuck in their head. They'll be presented with complete playable tracks provided by partners such as MySpace, Lala, or imeem."
Now, about your points: #1: If Google "turns off its APIs," it harms ALL its partners and thereby shoots itself in the foot. #3: This is a related issue--if Google shows signs of using private APIs, it will lose the support of its developer partners. Again, not a good idea. #4: There is no evidence that Google is "disrupting" Apple at this time; quite the opposite actually. In fact, Google has recently reiterated its whole-hearted support for Apple.
By the way, how hard do you think it would be for Apple to change its default Internet search partner from Google to, say, Bing. A mere flip of a switch, Pacalis...
----------------------
On Oct 29 09:56 PM pacalis wrote:
> Whoa, fanboi frenzy... The author is correct and let me explain why.
>
> #1. Google can turn off it's api's at any time - so it controls the
> apple apps (which are relatively simple to develop btw).
> #2. Google is integrating streetview, which no other firm has right
> now. Not even the firm Apple bought. For all googles faults this
> is a wholly new capability.
> #3. Google is multiplatform, and with Android will offer better integration
> over time.
> #4. Google can afford to disrupt apple (and AT&T) and is doing
> so. It is doing so in maps. It is doing so in VOIP with google talk...
> It is doing so with Android, both in OS and through it's hardware
> partners. Apple can not disrupt google as Apple does not compete
> in Google's markets.
But at the end of it collaboration is more critical now than in the 90's and therefore isolated platforms are not attractive, but Apple is walking the line better than most, by better I mean they are only 10% point from taking the top smart phone from RIMM.
Now phones aren't operating systems and it is certainly possible that Android will win over time but in the near term it is RIMM that is in trouble and with $30 Billion in cash Apple has some options.
> Pacalis, is it a good strategy to begin one's argument with a
> dismissive insult to those with opposing views?
Strategy in a comments section about an apple product? That's funny.
> Now, about your points: #1: If Google "turns off its APIs,"
Not my point. My point was about control. See my later comment.
And yes, Apple could switch to Bing default. But that only affects some the mobile portion of google search (about 6% of search revenues). Moreover, mobile search is growing in developing faster in developing nations where Apple isn't the leader in smartphone adoption.
#4: There is no evidence that Google is "disrupting"
> Apple at this time; quite the opposite actually. In fact, Google
> has recently reiterated its whole-hearted support for Apple.
I sincerely believe you are very wrong here. Apple makes money on is proprietary OS, phone hardware, apps and complementary access to ATTs infrastructure. Google is threatening every one of those revenue streams by offering lower cost, and open, alternatives. For a disruption a product or service does not need to be as high quality as the incumbent, in fact it typically isn't, it just needs to address under-served markets at much lower cost. Google is doing this in spades.
On top of that, I wouldn't be so sanguine about Streetview. I've yet to find it to be more accurate than 200 feet. I've always had to move the view manually to find the correct address. Besides, Streetview would be useless while driving--the screen is too small and it would require looking away from the road. In some states, using a handheld device while driving can get you arrested--a nice thing if you like to pay fines and higher insurance premiums.
You say your point was about "control." Do you think Google would use that supposed control to harm itself? That's MY point.
And regarding Apple's ability to flip the switch to set, for example, Bing as the search default rather than Google, Apple could just as easily do that for ALL its platforms, not just mobile. The total represents a significant portion of total Internet searches. It would indeed be harmful to Google if such action were taken.
As far as Google's "disruption" is concerned, it is currently near zero. I don't expect that to change much over time.
----------------------...
On Oct 30 01:39 PM pacalis wrote:
>On Oct 30 12:28 PM dea_sys wrote:
>> Pacalis, is it a good strategy to begin one's argument with a
>> dismissive insult to those with opposing views?
>Strategy in a comments section about an apple product? That's funny.
>> Now, about your points: #1: If Google "turns off its APIs,"
>Not my point. My point was about control. See my later comment.
>And yes, Apple could switch to Bing default. But that only affects some >the mobile portion of google search (about 6% of search revenues). >Moreover, mobile search is growing in developing faster in developing >nations where Apple isn't the leader in smartphone adoption.
>>#4: There is no evidence that Google is "disrupting"
>> Apple at this time; quite the opposite actually. In fact, Google
>> has recently reiterated its whole-hearted support for Apple.
>I sincerely believe you are very wrong here. Apple makes money on is >proprietary OS, phone hardware, apps and complementary access to >ATTs infrastructure. Google is threatening every one of those revenue >streams by offering lower cost, and open, alternatives. For a disruption a >product or service does not need to be as high quality as the incumbent, >in fact it typically isn't, it just needs to address under-served markets at >much lower cost. Google is doing this in spades.
1. There is no "ad hominem attack" in my last response. Quote the comment if you feel differently.
2. That the impact of google on iphone is near zero and won't change over time. This doesn't make sense given the current state of google related apps accross all smart phones and the developing ecosystem of googles new product introductions.
The argument that apple could switch to Bing anytime and that would hurt google is correct but meaningless to the consumer. No one is buying phones for default search providers. They are buying phones on the basis of service, basic phone functions and then google app integration, exchange integration, itunes integration etc..
On Oct 29 10:27 AM bmesco1 wrote:
> I want my GPS anchored to my car so I can glance at it at will.
> I DON'T want it next to my ear even it is it free and all better
> and getting me places. A signficant safety issue here.
On Oct 29 12:32 PM jack dee wrote:
> much to do about nothing. The real mistake here was to publish anything
> that even a slight neg edge about AAPL.
>
> The fanclub here, just want to hear to good news, nothing else. Does'nt
> matter whats true or not, just that the story puts down a couple
> of companies while shouting how great steve and apple are.
>
> Perhaps the best thing to do would be to start a new site, Seeking
> Apple just for the apple fans?
www.roughlydrafted.com.../
First, It is even not sure whether or not they can use some of the public domain data for commercial usage. However, it seems they can easily get away from this due to the power of their brand-name.
Second, their maps have serious accuracy issues. Some resource of their data is pretty out-dated. After switching to their own data, their maps begin to show fictional cities, misplaced cities, fictional parks, fictional lakes, as well as missed street names and directions. Their maps also lack information for newer development.
It is not ethical for them to rush out a navigation system to public while their data has not undergone extensive evaluations. It is risky for the customers to rely on their navigation system right now.
However, it seems nowadays google can do anything with a free pass. It is dangerous.