x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Apple Maps is said to be up to five times more efficient than Google Maps

Apple Maps is said to be up to five times more efficient than Google Maps

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags :

Apple Maps is said to be up to five times more efficient than Google Maps
There is a lot to be said about Apple's new mapping application, most of it negative. Is there any redeeming quality to the application? According to the crew at Onavo, testing shows that Apple Maps uses much less data than Google Maps does. Using a Standard View, on average, Google Maps used 1.3MB to load up a requested map while that same location on Apple Maps used just 271KB. That works out to about 80% less data used by Apple's beleaguered mapping application. And when it comes to other actions, such as zooming in to see an intersection, Google uses 7 times the amount of data that Apple uses.

Apple Maps uses less data than Google Maps

Apple Maps uses less data than Google Maps

The reason for such a large difference is because Apple Maps uses vector graphics which means that the map you're viewing doesn't have to be re-drawn every time you adjust it. The use of such technology means that Apple's maps are re-sized dynamically resulting in smoother movements that use much less data than Google Maps. The latter has to re-load and re-draw the map each time you make a change to it. These days, that might make a huge difference when it comes time to pay your monthly bill.

(Just to make it clear what the comparison is all about, Onavo tested Apple Maps with the Google Maps application that had been a staple of iOS until the latest release. Google Maps for Android has had vector graphics for two years)

In Satellite View, the difference is a lot smaller, but it still is there. Using the view from above will run you 428KB on average for Apple Maps vs. 930KB using Google Maps. Here, using Apple Maps eats up about half the data that Google's application does.

According to Onavo, 70% of Apple iPhone owners use the Maps app and it makes up 5% of the data used by the phone on data networks. Using less data is not only important for those paying the bill, but is also important to the carriers as well. And yes, this might all be good news to Apple iPhone users, but it doesn't explore the issues that iOS 6 users have had with Apple Maps. If there is no trust in the map that you have on your screen, what good is saving data? For Apple Maps to become the complete package that Cupertino was aiming for, it must be made bullet-proof and re-launched so that Apple could distance itself from the problems users have had. Once Apple Maps users feel that they can rely 100% on the service, then and only then will all of the data saving techniques used by Apple become an important selling tool.

source: Onavo via ElectricPig

  • Options

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 12:52 6

1. darkkjedii (Posts: 22470; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

When apple maps is debugged it will b an awesome app. Rite now it's still pretty good Atleast n all my tests.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:21 37

20. Pings (Posts: 303; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

Apple's maps will never be on the same level as Google Maps. Apple does not data log GPS info like Google does. No one can match the level of information of Street View. Companies don't go out and take take pictures and log GPS data like Google does. Nobody not even GPS companies have the GPS data set that Google has. Nobody!

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 19:44 3

76. jroc74 (Posts: 6018; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)

I realize what's happening.

You must mean Google Maps on iOS. Sorry iPhone, iOS fans, but its had turn by turn with voice on Android since.....forever.

The title of this article coulda been a lil more accurate....it explains why some, most of these posts dont really mesh with the article. Cuz many probably did like me...and didnt really read the article....lol.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 20:49 3

79. Hemlocke (unregistered)

Wrong. Nokia's maps are based on many multiples more data gathered, yearly. Google's Street View cars have gathered 5 million miles of data. Nokia gathers 3.3 billion miles...a year. Having access to the UPS and FedEx data sets is where it's at, not Google's data.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:28 23

23. PhenomFaz (Posts: 1236; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)

5 times more efficient...right...of couurse right
its five times more efficient....at being a joke :)
I mean we gotta thank apple for those moments where we could actually bash the iSh33p and Apple for the maps and the number of hilarious jokes it spawned...Apple is also 5 times more efficient at being a clown company!

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 20:51

80. Hemlocke (unregistered)

Google is right there with them. 7 years, and this?

posted on 04 Oct 2012, 03:21

86. PhenomFaz (Posts: 1236; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)

Dude 7 years ago you didnt have Maps and then you were looking for one...they were the pioneers in mapping on PCs and on mobiles devices...so don't start judging and comparing by some article on some website! They ares still the best and most accurate out there and Apple is coying the 'idea' and trying to become greaat by standing on the shoulders or base work of a giant...that dont count for much!
We all know how Apple bought witnesses in the trial against Samsun...so how hard it is for them to bribe a study and get it posted...and dont say they dont do this. That would be really naive of you

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:41 26

27. Muhannad (Posts: 455; Member since: 20 Sep 2011)

It's also proven to be 5 times more inaccurate then Google Maps.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 16:24

66. messiah (Posts: 438; Member since: 19 Feb 2010)

Lol... apple's map app sucks so they justify that it uses less data saving g the bill payer money..... ya....way to go apple .... you want to make things affordable on the user, how about charging half what you do for a new phone.... take some heat off us and the retailers.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 12:52 7

2. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)

Naah they missed a ZERO. It's 50 times better. Reminds me of days where there were "funded" research to show how Windows was more secure than LINUX :)

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:39 5

54. Jelly_Bean (Posts: 109; Member since: 11 Sep 2012)

And still major companies use Linux platform to find out vulnerabilities in Windows and other platforms lolzzz...

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 12:56 58

3. Galen20K (Posts: 541; Member since: 26 Dec 2008)

Of course it uses less data, IOS maps contains so much "less" data. So much missing...

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:04 25

12. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Yupper. Wait until iMaps is working and then re-test. This article is a blatant attempt to turn a negative (iMaps fail) into a positive (iMaps is so much more 'efficient'). Lipstick on a pig doesn't change the fact that it is still a pig.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:04 2

41. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

In fairness to PA, Giz did this same article a few days ago (I think it was Jesus Diaz) and it was very tongue-in-cheek about all the same points that are being made. Vector graphics, yes, but minimal useful info, especially about POIs

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:09 10

16. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4025; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

Lol, maybe it's wrong...
It might be "Apple Maps is said to be up to five
times more efficient than Google

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:06 7

44. Hammerfest (Posts: 383; Member since: 12 May 2012)

yup, compared my GNote with Google Maps vs my uncles iPhone5 with Apple maps...

MISSING MORE THEN 5x the data... hell even Google Maps has the hill and detailed information from my place to one of my favorite restarunts... not the case with Apple Maps! we even tested 6 other locations and the LACK OF DATA (rather then "less data used) is AWFUL

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:40 11

55. remixfa (Posts: 14261; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

the article isnt comparing the Google Maps we android users use. Its comparing the iOS version of google maps to Apple maps. That version of google maps is about as feature filled as the 2008 version of Google maps android users used. Its just a basic, light frills, not very advanced version of google maps. Its like comparing mapquest to the current google maps.. 2 different leagues.
They needed to explain that more in the article since it really makes it seem like they are talking about "google maps" not "the crappy version of google maps iOS users use because Apple refused to let google upgrade it to the newer versions because they didnt want to look even worse than they currently do with the switch to apple maps"

Imagine how bad the backlash would be if they went from a full featured google maps like android users use, to apple maps... instead of that 1/5th version of google maps they were using. Apple maps sucks by comparison to the iOS version of google maps and just blows enormous chunks compared to the full Android version.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 17:32

70. jroc74 (Posts: 6018; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)

OOHH....Now I see....lol. Thanks for the clarification. I admit I didnt even read the article... :(

posted on 04 Oct 2012, 11:24

88. networkdood (Posts: 6330; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)

ahhh, so this is just another shoddy article by the hacks at P.A., right?

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:08 4

46. Bears_Fan (Posts: 3; Member since: 24 Aug 2012)

Seems PA just jumping on the apple band wagon as usual. Lets pump these stats out showing Apple does thing better... SMH Android fans are smarter than that. But obviously isheep will always show their wool.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 19:06

74. bayusuputra (Posts: 963; Member since: 12 Feb 2012)

This comment is so much win..

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 12:58 10

4. ILikeBubbles (Posts: 525; Member since: 17 Jan 2011)

although vector graphics is pretty nifty... but Apple has a looong way to go before they can even begin to rival Google maps...

and something makes me think they'll have a lot harder time "innovating" as quickly as Google did with Android.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:46 10

29. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2705; Member since: 26 May 2011)

Vector graphics are nifty. That's probably why Google's been using them for Maps on Android for almost 2 years now.

I'm a bit concerned that Onavo compared Apple Maps to iOS Google Maps or the GMaps website for this test rather than the proper Google Maps app on Android.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:05 5

43. NexusKoolaid (Posts: 481; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)

You are correct sir! From the Onavo blog:

"Onavo’s team of data experts set out to compare the data consumed by Apple Maps on iOS 6 to that of the Google-based iOS 5 Maps app."

So with Vector graphics, Apple Maps simply gives iProducts what we've enjoyed on Android for quite a while.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 15:11

58. Jobes (Posts: 364; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)

I didn't even catch that, they used Google maps via website rather than the app?

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 16:20 1

65. remixfa (Posts: 14261; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

they said it was the older iOS version of Google Maps. They wouldnt dare compare it to Android google maps because it would wipe the floor with that craptastic Apple maps application.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 18:03

71. Jobes (Posts: 364; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)

So what was the point of the company doing it to begin with.. then for them to turn around and say its 5x more efficient?? Its stuff like this that causes Apple fans to get their superiority complex... they read "the best iPhone yet" or "5x more efficient than Google Maps" that is just free (incorrect) advertising. I cant say I see the point of articles like this.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:00 7

5. ajac09 (Posts: 1481; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)

thats like saying phone arena would be more effecient if it only talked about facts. You wouldnt has as much informaton. Same goes for IOS maps its more effectient becasue there is much less to it.

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:00 11

6. androiddownsouth (Posts: 598; Member since: 02 May 2012)

Who cares if it is more efficient if it fails to get you where you need to go?

posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:13 7

17. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Because it is more efficient at failing to get you where you want to go? ;-)

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories