Apple’s extra Airport..
Was anyone expecting Apple to replace Google’s Maps application with something superior? Apparently, the iPhone user base and Apple actually expected this to happen.
If you look at the most extremely biased sites reviewing the new ‘Apple’ Maps app for iOS 6 you will see guarded optimism and lots of ‘reasoning’ clash with angry rants from amazed and disappointed users.
One thing I don’t see is anyone calling it the ‘Maps app that Apple bought from TomTom’ the best I’ve seen is a mention that they relied heavily on TomTom and OpenStreetMap for data alone.
Instead I see a very consistent collection of sympathetic remarks like: ‘this is beta, it can only get better’, ‘for a first attempt this is outstanding’, ‘people will question anyone who takes their own path..’
But Apple isn’t taking their own path, they are merely attempting (badly) to replace something that wasn’t really broken.
Sure, Google wasn’t toiling endlessly to include all the updates it was adding to the Android version of Google Maps.
I’m guessing Apple really expected Google to beta test ideas on the Android and then polish them up and finalize them on the iPhone?
So sure, Google put Android development first, and there were things that Google Maps did better on the Android, but that still doesn’t mean it ‘had to go’.
Apple could have offered both solutions in a ‘use what you like’ approach to pleasing it’s user base, but this is a company making headlines for outrageous profits and the working conditions of it’s manufacturing partners.
Removing the choice to pick another company’s solution would clearly explain why Apple didn’t take a settlement from Samsung and wanted to ban their phones. Apple want’s profits, and if Apple wants really happy customers they could lower prices and focus on better apps vs. removing the best ones for inferior versions.
And in other NewsGoogle has blessed a new meta tag!
Do you publish content that you would call ‘news’?
Would you like Google to better understand the topic of your posts?
Would you like the freedom to ignore keyword use in a topic for style reasons?
Then brothers and sisters, this new meta-tag is what you’ve been waiting for!
The format is very simple, and it belongs near the top of your page content, usually in the <head> … </head> section.
Here’s an example:
<meta name=”news_keywords” content=”10 keywords, separated, by commas, just like, meta keywords, etc..”>
That’s some ‘easy breezy’ SEO optimization, and it’s great if you are indeed publishing ‘news'; Not just ranting about Apple.