[gernica]

Typical Dangermoose, dismissive of the facts when it contradicts your argument. I don't care how significant the facts are, they contradict statements you made.

And I never said anywhere in this argument that it was a product selling feature. I have only listed it as an enhancement to existing technology.

Right, what I want you to do is spell out very clearly where you think I have contradicted myself.

I'd also like you to find at least one thread where I have been wrong and refused to admit it. Definitively I mean, not having the same opinion as you doesn't mean that I am wrong.

Don't you think that if everyone else understands apart from you, then you might be the problem?

[Kolokireo]

Don't you think that if everyone else understands apart from you, then you might be the problem?

No, it's pretty clear that everyone else is insane and this is all a conspiracy.

[gernica]

No, it's pretty clear that everyone else is insane and this is all a conspiracy.

Damn and blast that sodding signature.

[77Dinaartickire]

Right, what I want you to do is spell out very clearly where you think I have contradicted myself.

HOLY COW, did I say you contradicted yourself? No I did not. I said, I posted facts that contradict claims you have made. This is a prime example of why arguing with you is so pointless.

I'd also like you to find at least one thread where I have been wrong and refused to admit it. Definitively I mean, not having the same opinion as you doesn't mean that I am wrong.

http://community.futuremark.com/foru...=1#post1720724

You stated "It is on here, but out in the real world precisely no-one gives a f**k.". That one was incredibly easy to prove you wrong by the simple fact that I posted not one, but two links to areas where people have shown an interest in the technology. I have been trying to explain to you that there are people, regardless of how many, that are interested in this tech.

No doubt you will take your typical dismissive stance and say that none of the facts count because it doesn't represent the group YOU think should only have an opinion about it.

Don't you think that if everyone else understands apart from you, then you might be the problem?

Understand what? All I have been trying to tell you is that I feel Apple should have included a new technology which improves upon their existing technology. Not as a feature to sell more phones, but just to have it. I only say that because so many other companies do support it. If barely anyone else supported the new codec, then I wouldn't be advocating for it. I don't know why this has become so complicated.

I understand you want to make a claim that you feel the consumer base as a whole doesn't care about the tech, but that's not an excuse not to have it when there are people that do want it and other companies that do support it.

[HedoShoodovex]

What's not to understand? I am talking about iPhone users not having to pay for the ability to download and use this application. This brings an improvement to a product that belongs to Googles competitor. Unless there is some kind of monetary exchange or some other beneficial reason for Google to do this, then I stand by my statement that Google would be doing this for free.

As someone who spent over $80,000 on Google Adwords alone last year, I can tell you that each and every app and service Google creates is used as a vehicle for advertising. In fact, over 96% of their income is generated from it. Google Maps collects an enormous amount of data from user searches, which in turn is used to affect bid prices on terms that are generated by pay-per-click ads. You can also pay to have a sponsored listing on Google Maps that stands out a bit more than a free Google Places listing. Google may not charge people for many of their apps and services, but they certainly rake in an enormous stream of revenue from just about everything they create.

So yes, it is very much in Google's interest to create a Maps app for iOS 6.

[77Dinaartickire]

As someone who spent over $80,000 on Google Adwords alone last year, I can tell you that each and every app and service Google creates is used as a vehicle for advertising. In fact, over 96% of their income is generated from it. Google Maps collects an enormous amount of data from user searches, which in turn is used to affect bids on terms that are generated by pay-per-click ads. Google may not charge people for many of their apps and services, but they certainly rake in an enormous stream of revenue from just about everything they create.

Understandable. I've already conceded the point. I made a bad assumption on that one.

[2swasseneons]

As someone who spent blah blah blah

Are you capable of posting on these boards without talking about yourself?

We get it, you are awesome.

[AndyScouchek]

Are you capable of posting on these boards without talking about yourself?

We get it, you are awesome.

Will is different, he tries to put others down to display superiority.

[HedoShoodovex]

Will is different, he tries to put others down to display superiority.

Tries is the keyword!

[Super-Luser]

Will is different, he tries to put others down to display superiority.

I think you got him confused with Spermfossil.

[2swasseneons]

I think you got him confused with Spermfossil.

That is two times that this guy has done that.

Acu, treats these boards like a social network site. I only credit myself with quality control - sometimes even muting myself when I get carried away. But at least I can recognize this.

[AndyScouchek]

That is two times that this guy has done that.

Acu, treats these boards like a social network site. I only credit myself with quality control - sometimes even muting myself when I get carried away. But at least I can recognize this.

You know I jest! Acu's a good guy that contributes to these boards frequently, in a positive way. No need to get on his case.

[Kolokireo]

I think you got him confused with Spermfossil.

LOL

This forum never ceases to amuse me.

[HotboTgameR]

Will be interesting to see what MS do on this. On one hand they can dramatically increase the usage of it in the short term, but they may want to take the long term view and keep it on Windows Mobile in case they can pick up some of the users that will leave Apple over this.

I agree. They have arguably just as good of a map engine as google, so if they pushed out an app for maps on ios, it may in turn make their name better known. It's a gamble for them, but I cannot fathom that it would result in any loss really.

[AndyScouchek]

http://gizmodo.com/5946478/nyt-googl...nd-of-the-year

If it is approved, it will be in the App Store by the end of the year.

[2swasseneons]

Google is really nice. Awesome.

[Wezfyowk]

I agree. They have arguably just as good of a map engine as google, so if they pushed out an app for maps on ios, it may in turn make their name better known. It's a gamble for them, but I cannot fathom that it would result in any loss really.

the guy i work with swears by bing? maps and he has arcGIS on his desktop
he says ms maps are better than google maps

im not a fan of either to be honest
wait untill arcGIS make a map app and see how its meant to be done

[Annevecenqp]

http://gizmodo.com/5946478/nyt-googl...nd-of-the-year

If it is approved, it will be in the App Store by the end of the year.

I wouldn't quite trust that source yet. Not me being paranoid, it's just that yesterday Google were saying they had no plans for it, so unless it's changed overnight...

[AndyScouchek]

I wouldn't quite trust that source yet. Not me being paranoid, it's just that yesterday Google were saying they had no plans for it, so unless it's changed overnight...

I wouldn't trust anything yet, it is simply too soon to know. This was just another article countering that they wouldn't release it. My bet is on that they will though for the various reasons outlined in this thread.

[spamkillerj]

I wouldn't quite trust that source yet. Not me being paranoid, it's just that yesterday Google were saying they had no plans for it, so unless it's changed overnight...

Yeah, that story (or the NYT one it mentioned) doesn't quote any reliable, identifiable, sources; where as the one I posted quotes Google's big cheese.