SlashGear

1. 

   Chris Davies
   

   Reputation:6,378

    

   With Google Maps Navigation causing ripples not only among Android users but in the share prices of Garmin, TomTom and other mapping providers, it seems some location-based services providers are coming out fighting.  LaptopMag have been talking to Networks in Motion’s (NIM) Steve Andler, VP of marketing at the company responsible for Verizon’s VZ Navigator and the Gokivo iPhone app, and he’s pulling no punches about his opinion of Google.  Andler describes the idea of Android as being open as “a bunch of hooey”, and even goes so far as to suggest that “Google is doing exactly what Microsoft did, which is, they integrate stuff into the core, leaving no room for anyone to innovate.”

   Of course, it’s not surprising that Andler – and NIM – are frustrated, given the particular corner of software development they chose to carve out.  Andler’s core argument about PND software is that it requires more than a few voice prompts on top of a map.

   
   Google “doing exactly what Microsoft did” says angry GPS app dev

   Posted 4 months ago #
2. 

   AdBirds Founder
   Member

   Reputation:1

    

   Well, that’s interesting. We could use a good geocoding developer at AdBirds for our international services branching to Europe, Asia, ME, Africa, and Latin America

   Posted 4 months ago #
3. 

   Veronica Orozco
   Member

   Reputation:1

    

   The problem seems to be that the app developer lacks the drive to innovate. Sorry you’re on the losing team, but exploiting consumers with subscription based GPS deserves no sympathy.

   Posted 4 months ago #
4. 

   TomMariner
   Member

   Reputation:1

    

   Microsoft has long been accused of stealing (or buying) generic technologies to include with their OS shipments. That provides a rich subset of tasks like drivers (remember having to publish 150 modem connection strings for each of the brands and models) and program scheduling so developers can address individual markets. Now Google is being accused of the same behavior.

   To be honest, I side with the big M or the big G — Granted, you can get very very wealthy by providing a basic, essential building tool for applications, but that would be at the cost of making app cost prohibitive. If either the Windows series or the Android series only included the base kernel, and individual pieces were purchased from third parties, software for one computer would cost $10,000.

   Of course if your product is better than what is included “for free” in the OS, nothing prevents trying to sell it — It’s done every day.

   Posted 4 months ago #
5. 

   Greg
   Member

   Reputation:1

    

   I’ve used various turn-by-turn routing solutions for years. And I can honestly say that, for simply getting around, the best solution I’ve ever experienced did not provide detailed maps. Instead, when a “maneuver” was required, it warned me in advance and displayed only the upcoming maneuver with a “gauge” that filled as I got closer to the maneuver point. I gave me just the right amount of information and didn’t distract me otherwise.

   I hope that the Google solution has something like this, at least as a fallback. A routing service that is compromised when the available bandwidth is less than 3G or, god forbid, lowly gprs, seems dicey to me.

   It seems to me there is a qualitative difference between an OS that costs the user over $100 and is the sole property of a single company, and one that is available to anyone for free.

   Google has become an auctioneer. In the Google world, software and services are free and revenue is generated by auctioning add space to the highest bidder. Yes ,that may undermine folks dependent on the traditional software revenue model. But I have no sympathy for Mr. Andler. Hey. I remember when virtual memory hit the mainstream and all my “overlay” programming skills were suddenly obsolete :-)

   Posted 4 months ago #
6. 

   Ledgehanger
   Member

   Reputation:1

    

   Andler comes off as a bit of a whiner, I’m afraid (or rather more than a bit). Unless he can show that he somehow has a “right” to his particular customer base (and he can’t), his argument that Google is somehow doing wrong by trying to woo those same customers is silly at best. He complains that Google is going to stifle innovation, while what he would really like to do is… well… stifle innovation that’s not *his* innovation. Google is innovating in the model of how this information is monetized. The market will either accept that innovation to Google’s benefit (and Andler’s detriment), or it will not.

   Alternatively, if Andler is right and this type of application just doesn’t *work* well the way Google is doing it, then Networks in Motion simply has to do the work of laying that case out for customers. Quite frankly, if they can’t make their case to their market that their model is better, they don’t deserve to stay in business.

   Posted 4 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.