[wco81]

Originally Posted by Gubbi

It's worse here in Denmark, there are clouds on the images!!

That's a major problem since one of our customers is a big consultant house that does urban geo-tagging in the field on iPad 2s with an app. we developed. They can't place the tags precisely because they can't see the buildings they're supposed to tag.

Cheers

The built-in camera isn't geotagging accurately?

Should just be embedding the raw coordinates in the EXIF right?

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by Gubbi

Beta testing by crowd sourcing is very non-Apple, IMO.

Cheers

Apple already did it with Siri in iOS 5. They needed a large userbase to refine their voice algorithms. They were just more upfront about it by labeling Siri as a beta throughout iOS 5. And I agree it was strange that a beta feature was the headline feature for the iPhone 4S.

[wco81]

And it's still beta, isn't it?

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by wco81

And it's still beta, isn't it?

Apparently it is. I wonder what their criteria is to bring it out of beta? Language support has been greatly expanded in iOS 6. Are they looking for a certain % accuracy, a certain feature-set to be filled out?

[silent_guy]

Originally Posted by wco81

And it's still beta, isn't it?

Still beta, but improved to the point where it understands me reasonably well. That wasn't the case at launch: it basically didn't understand a word I was saying.

[french toast]

Isn't the apple mapping solution based off tom tom?

Tom tom is a very good mapping service...so how apple managed to fuck that up is anybody's guess.

[silent_guy]

Originally Posted by french toast

Isn't the apple mapping solution based off tom tom?

Tom tom is a very good mapping service...so how apple managed to fuck that up is anybody's guess.

The driving directions are really good actually. It's the POI database that sucks, at least where I live. For others, it's the satellite pics that are a major regression. POI and pics are not delivered by TomTom, AFAIK. And then there's the missing StreetView, of course, which IMHO is more useful than the flyover, even with it working very well on my house.

That the flyover is riddled with issues for things like bridges etc is less of an issue: technology can only do so much, extracting 3D coordinates from 2D pictures.

[wco81]

Yeah can that be automated or do they have to have artists render the scenes manually and locate it manually?

Maybe the startups they bought has some kind of automation tools.

Otherwise, it would take years to cover even just every significant city. Flyover is more interesting for well-known landmarks, not some nondescript office building in any given modern city.

[french toast]

Oh right..I'm still amazed by Google earth,street view really does take the piss...first time i had s go on that I thought it was some sort of black magic! Lol.

Nokia hasn't really got anything like either has it? Only the new augmented reality map..which I'll admit..is pretty darn sweet..but nothing ive seen compares to street view...

Really not I interested in fly over...sounds like a step backwards to me.

[silent_guy]

Originally Posted by wco81

Yeah can that be automated or do they have to have artists render the scenes manually and locate it manually?

It can be totally automated. I saw demos of this kind of technology in academia more than a decade ago.

Maybe the startups they bought has some kind of automation tools.

Yes. That's the C3 (and I think Poly9) acquisition.

Otherwise, it would take years to cover even just every significant city. Flyover is more interesting for well-known landmarks, not some nondescript office building in any given modern city.

It think it's 'just' a matter of flying over all cities a couple of times from different angles. It's a much faster and cheaper way than doing it by car, but the level of detail acquired is an order of magnitude smaller too obviously.

A couple of months ago while in Europe, I saw a TomTom car that looked just like the almost ubiquitous Google cars that you see a workday mornings swarm out from the Google mothership. So I assume TomTom has a similar program of filming the whole everything from ground level. Whether or not Apple will license that is a different question.

[Pressure]

Nice memorial on the Apple front page about Steve's passing one year ago.

[ltcommander.data]

http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/...or-a-wide-area

For all the iOS 6 Maps complaints, at least it seems to have better offline map caching due to more efficient vector maps vs bitmaps in iOS 5. Still not sure what the persistence algorithm is although it's apparently not RAM-based since it's been reported to persist after a device restart.

[silent_guy]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/...or-a-wide-area

For all the iOS 6 Maps complaints, at least it seems to have better offline map caching due to more efficient vector maps vs bitmaps in iOS 5. Still not sure what the persistence algorithm is although it's apparently not RAM-based since it's been reported to persist after a device restart.

The caching is indeed very impressive and persistent.

I was in no-data-cover land recently and it just worked, even in areas where I hadn't been earlier: it looks like its low detail tiles span a very large range, so it caches major arteries, airports etc. over large swaths of land even if you haven't zoomed in there earlier.

The place finding search algo still sucks though.

Edit: I think Android has the kind of caching, doesn't it? Or do you have to explicitly select an area to download?

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by silent_guy

Edit: I think Android has the kind of caching, doesn't it? Or do you have to explicitly select an area to download?

The AppleInsider report, perhaps not the most unbiased source, found that iOS 6 automatic map caching generally includes a larger area than automatic caching in Android. They reported after scanning San Fransico with iOS 6 maps then going offline, street level maps were still available for locations up to 740 miles away (Salt Lake City). On Android they found some major highways disappearing after 10 miles with Highway 101 being gone 70 miles outside San Francisco. Android also offers the option of manually caching a 50 miles radius which offers all zoom levels within that area, but again degrades rapidly outside. iOS 6 caching seems to offer a larger cached area although not with as many zooms levels, but AppleInsider considers its degradation outside the original area of interest more graceful.

[wco81]

740 miles would be more than enough for most car trips that you'd take in a day.

Now if you can do turn-by-turn purely with cached maps and even have it recalculate routes without a data connection, that's a big improvement over Android's Google Maps Navigation. My understanding is that while you can cache pretty big tiles, once you decide to have it calculate a route, you need a data connection.

So lets say you don't have mobile data at all, you cache the area you're going to visit from the Hotel Wifi and then go out to the car and plug in your destination. Would it work without a data connection at this point?

If iOS6 does work, that's as good as a PND, though having a data connection would offer other advantages.

If you can determine how much range to cache and downloaded just that much data, so much the better.

[ltcommander.data]

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/10/05/...a6-based-chip/

An A6-class 3rd gen iPad refresh may be in the works. A developer has started seeing an iPad3,5 show up using an ARMv7s based CPU. A true 4th gen iPad should be an iPad4,1 although you never know seeing the 2nd gen iPhone 3G was just the iPhone1,2. I guess the possibilities include this being an imminent iPad 3 refresh for this year, this being next year's $399 full size iPad to replace the iPad 2, this being next year's iPad 4 or this simply being a prototype that will never see the light of day. This isn't the iPad Mini since that seems to be the iPad2,5 and iPad2,6 that has previously shown up with A5 references.

If they do put out an iPad 3 refresh this year, I wonder if they will basically use the A6 as is or if it'll be a unique chip? With the A6 offering A5X equivalent GPU performance a direct substitution with maybe a minor clock speed bump would be sufficient for a refresh. They might miss the 128-bit memory controller at that iPad Retina resolution though. So perhaps an A6X with a return to the SGX543MP4 operating at A6 clock speeds (~325 MHz vs 250MHz) with a 128-bit bus and LPDDR2-1066? That would be good for a 30% GPU performance bump. Appropriate for fall 2012 iPad 3 refresh but a 2014 iPad 4 would need to be more aggressive. Apple churning out 3.5 SoC in a year (A5X, A6, A6X with the 32nm A5 being the half) would be quite a feat.

[wco81]

They claimed they couldn't meet demand of iPhone 5.

Last year, they said they could have sold more than the 37 million iPhone 4S that they reported for the holiday quarter.

I would think they're hoarding A6 and all the fab capacity to maximize iPhone 5 supply for the rest of the year.

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by wco81

They claimed they couldn't meet demand of iPhone 5.

Last year, they said they could have sold more than the 37 million iPhone 4S that they reported for the holiday quarter.

I would think they're hoarding A6 and all the fab capacity to maximize iPhone 5 supply for the rest of the year.

But is limited iPhone 5 supplies due to constrained A6 production/fab capacity? It seems the more commonly reported constraints are for in-cell touch screen production and QC problems with the housing. As such there may well be enough A6/32nm fab capacity for an iPad 3.5. The concern would be whether limited in-cell touch screen production means the iPad 3.5 would have to ship without one which would be disappointing for a flagship device considering even the new iPod Touch has one. However, it's interesting to note that Samsung doesn't seem to be a supplier for the touch screen in the iPhone 5 whereas they are the primary supplier of Retina displays for the iPad. It may well be that Apple is dedicating certain suppliers to each product line, which means that the iPad could get in-cell screens after-all since Samsung making them doesn't take away from existing iPhone 5 capacity.

An iPad 3 refresh now wouldn't make much sense if the iPad 4 is still going to be due in March 2013. However, an October 2012 iPad 3.5 might make sense if Apple wants the iPad 4 to have Rogue and OpenGL ES 3.0 to truly be a generational improvement. If Rogue isn't ready until closer to mid-2013, then the iPad 4 would have to be delayed from it's usual March release leaving the iPad 3 on sale another quarter. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple wanted to get rid of the iPad 3 as soon as possible since it's very much a compromise being thicker, heavier, and having less battery life than the iPad 2 in order to accommodate the Retina display and LTE and now lacks the Lightning connector. An October iPad 3.5 would then be well timed being 7 months after the iPad 3 and 8 months before a WWDC June release of the iPad 4. If the iPad 4 was coming in March 2013, a straight reuse of the A6 with little clock speed change for the iPad 3.5 would be most efficient. But if the iPad 4 isn't coming until June 2013, I think it'd make sense to do a dedicated A6X for the iPad 3.5, say 1.5GHz dual core ARMv7s with 375MHz SGX543MP4 and a 128-bit memory bus with LPDDR2-1066. That'd provide a 2x increase in CPU performance, a 50% improvement in GPU performance, and a 33% improvement in theoretical memory bandwidth over the A5X. And since only 1 GPU core is being added over the A6 the percentage die area increase will be smaller than the A5>A5X transition to help mitigate fab capacity concerns.

An October 2012 iPad 3.5 (with iPad Mini?) and June 2013 iPad 4 with the new iPhone and iPod Touch already announced will mean a long gap with no iOS-related announcements, but given the state of Maps they could probably focus on software and place an iOS 6.1 event during that time to highlight Maps, Siri, and iCloud improvements in order to maintain media attention on their ecosystem. Or maybe some long rumoured product could finally be completed and announced during that gap like an Apple television set or iTunes streaming service.

[wco81]

Just bought my iPad 3 in June or July.

Would be somewhat ticked if they came out with another iPad so soon, though unless there's a big jump in CPU/GPU, it won't necessarily obsolete my iPad so quickly, as far as apps. being updated to support higher performance profile (esp. if they put more RAM in the SOC).

Some speculation has been that Sharp IGZO displays would be the upgrade path to reduce power consumption and thereby reduce the thickness and weight of the form factor.

[dagamer]

Originally Posted by wco81

Just bought my iPad 3 in June or July.

Would be somewhat ticked if they came out with another iPad so soon, though unless there's a big jump in CPU/GPU, it won't necessarily obsolete my iPad so quickly, as far as apps. being updated to support higher performance profile (esp. if they put more RAM in the SOC).

Some speculation has been that Sharp IGZO displays would be the upgrade path to reduce power consumption and thereby reduce the thickness and weight of the form factor.

We have to remember that the iPad 3 leaked several months in advance even though the only difference was a few millimeters increase in thickness. And leakers would certainly notice a new 9.7" iPad with the Lightning connector, it's unmistakeable.

Because of the smaller size of the Lightning connector, I don't think Apple can make a tiny revision to the device without being tempted to go all the way. Most of the refinements that an iPad 4 would have can't just be suddenly stuck into a hypothetical 3.5. Even when products have obvious shortcomings, Apple still waits for their yearly refresh in order to catch everything up, even delaying the product additional months compared to expectations in the case of the iPhone 4S so that everything launches on time.

What we can extrapolate however is that if/when the iPad Mini does get a retina screen, I don't ever see it using the 45nm A5X. That chip has way too many compromises. It's going to get a die shrink at some point so the 32nm version has identical performance as the 45nm version, and Apple doesn't have to worry about the loss of memory bandwidth performance that comes with using the A6.

[wco81]

Well the latest rumors are that Apple has ordered 10 million iPad Minis for the 4th quarter.

That's less than what the regular iPad would be expected to sell in the holiday quarter. Yet how much will iPad Mini cannibalize regular iPad sales?

Apple would ideally hope for none or minimal cannibalization. But you never know, iPad 3 will be one of the oldest tablets available this Holiday season, with Amazon undercutting them for the 10-inch config while there will be several W8 tablets that get a lot of attention as well.

[anexanhume]

Originally Posted by wco81

Well the latest rumors are that Apple has ordered 10 million iPad Minis for the 4th quarter.

That's less than what the regular iPad would be expected to sell in the holiday quarter. Yet how much will iPad Mini cannibalize regular iPad sales?

Apple would ideally hope for none or minimal cannibalization. But you never know, iPad 3 will be one of the oldest tablets available this Holiday season, with Amazon undercutting them for the 10-inch config while there will be several W8 tablets that get a lot of attention as well.

I think this a product where you have little concern about cannibalization. It's about protecting the market. The only harm in cannibalization is likely going to be profit margins, but those are so robust elsewhere it shouldn't be a huge deal. The only question I have is how silly will the ipod touch prices look after the mini is priced?

[wco81]

I guess if the iPad Mini sells in the volumes they hope, while the iPod Touch 5G sales suffer, they can either bail on offering iPod Touch in the future or find a way to reduce costs on it to make it more competitive.

I think they'd be able to sell the 16 GB Touch for $249 in decent volumes, unless the market really is moving towards 7-inch tablets and "phablets" as alternatives to smart phones.

You can't pocket those as easily as the Touch but people are making do and making the tradeoff in size, weight and reduced battery life.

[ltcommander.data]

http://www.macotakara.jp/blog/ipod/entry-17953.html

Well benchmarks for the 5th gen iPod Touch are in. Looks like its A5 is identically clocked to the iPhone 4S (800MHz CPU/200MHz GPU). Teardowns probably won't take long to confirm the assumption it's using the 32nm version. I thought given the 18% increase in resolution there was a chance Apple would use a more iPad 2 like frequency (1 Ghz CPU/250MHz GPU) to better maintain the same GPU performance per pixel. I wonder if that means game developers will optimize separately for the 5th gen iPod Touch and iPhone 4S (not the just resolution difference but simplify effects for the iPod Touch) or just base the level of graphics effects for both devices on the 5th gen iPod Touch performance profile potentially leaving some performance unutilized in the iPhone 4S (although I suppose it would maintain a more stable frame rate)?

[tangey]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

http://www.macotakara.jp/blog/ipod/entry-17953.html

I wonder if that means game developers will optimize separately for the 5th gen iPod Touch and iPhone 4S (not the just resolution difference but simplify effects for the iPod Touch) or just base the level of graphics effects for both devices on the 5th gen iPod Touch performance profile potentially leaving some performance unutilized in the iPhone 4S (although I suppose it would maintain a more stable frame rate)?

Or just letterbox the games on the touch ?