No Transit in iOS6

[Brandon Martin-Anderson]

Hey everyone,

It appears Apple will not include public transit directions as a
built-in feature in the next version of iOS. Here's a blog post about
it: http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/06/12/apples-new-maps-app-in-ios-6-is-missing-one-important-thing-public-transportation-directions/.

I have some questions:

(a) Is this a consequence of the Google/Apple feud? Viz: Google runs
the data aggregator-normalizer and routing engine and Apple doesn't
want to use it anymore, nor do they want to take on the expense of
duplicating it. If so, someone could maybe make a business out of
running a contract aggregator-normalizer/routing engine.

(b) How do y'all feel about that? Is it a terrible step back for
public transit access, or is it a chance for third party apps to
shine?

-B

[Michael Smith]

I agree that it is incredibly unfortunately that the new built in iOS map will not have transit nor walking or bicycling trip planning. I don't see this as a part of the Google/Apple feud since Bing maps at least does transit trip planning. My guess is that Apple simple didn't have enough time to do everything and when push came to shove they did not prioritize transit and other alternative forms of transportation.

I hope that 1) Google quickly creates a map app for iOS that includes alt trans trip planning, and that Apple will approve it; and 2) Apple will realize that they can use OTP and make it even better.

And note that walkscore folks thankfully are trying to motivate Apple.

Michael Smith · General Manager & Chief Technology Officer · NextBus Inc.
Direct (510) 995-3207 · Mobile (415) 260-4700
msm...@nextbus.com

Webtech Wireless  |  InterFleet  |  NextBus  |  Quadrant  |  Telematics for the Planet ®

[Joe Hughes]

First of all, I have to say that it's great to see so much discussion about easy mobile access to transit directions.  Now that there's a little more info out there about the changes, I've seen some more informed discussion on blogs like Andy Baio's:

http://waxy.org/2012/06/busting_the_ios_6_transit_map_myths/

and Clay Johnson's:

http://www.informationdiet.com/blog/read/apple-public-transportation-and-ios6

There's still an open question about whether Apple will include any built-in transit routing on launch or later, but I'd like to think that they wouldn't talk about promoting third-party transit apps in their keynote if they planned on "sherlocking" them in the next few months.  (I'm not at WWDC myself, though, and it'd be interesting to know if there was further discussion of the topic in breakout sessions.)

Since their integration is so routing-focused, it seems like a good time for those of you with routing engine projects to do some outreach to the developers who will be considering creating a transit routing app for the first time.

It's kinda interesting that they'll be categorizing directions apps by coverage area in the app store, effectively creating a platform-specific City-Go-Round. I think it will help promote and hopefully spur the creation of great region-specific transit apps in major metro areas, and provide a way to add new "coverage" in areas where agencies are being stubborn about their data.  But will that weaken the case for open data?

Joe

[Richard Kendall Wolf]

On Jun 13, 2012, at 3:05 PM, Joe Hughes wrote:

> (I'm not at WWDC myself, though, and it'd be interesting to know if there was further discussion of the topic in breakout sessions.)

I am at WWDC. I attended the MapKit session. The NDA precludes us from discussing any of the details of WWDC outside the keynote ... but I think I'm safe in saying that the MapKit folks pretty much echoed and expanded upon that which was briefly alluded to at the keynote. Apple seems very supportive of third party efforts in this for a variety of reasons. :)

[Aaron Antrim]

It is great to see the discussion this has spurred.  I am looking forward to seeing where it goes.

If the release version of iOS 6 depends exclusively on 3rd party apps for transit information, I think it is likely there will be some pros for transit developers, but a major downside for public transportation agencies and their customers (with a little upside).

As Joe said, the Apple's transit app directory will be like a platform-specific City-Go-Round.  It will be result in more attention and downloads of transit apps.  And more revenue for developers.  This will create more innovation.  It is likely that customers will see more and better choices for agency and region-specific apps — apps that are tailored to specific service features and regional needs.

*This makes it even more important for transit agencies to make their GTFS data open, and to make arrival data available as well.*

The tradeoff of Apple's approach that there are more steps, and thus barriers, to accessing transit data.  Currently, on Android, iPhone, and other devices, transit and driving directions are presented on an equal footing; transit is just one tap away.  Also, I can go to an unfamiliar place and use a familiar app to find my way on transit.

I think it says something that in the iOS 6 "preview" page on Apple's site (http://www.apple.com/ios/ios6/maps/), a significant amount of copy is devoted to "Turn-by-Turn Navigation" (driving) and "Traffic".  Compare to Google's Maps for mobile page, which presents navigation and directions features for biking, walking, driving, and transit without giving more attention to any one mode.  From their marketing alone, it appears that Apple apparently does not consider their transit-using customers (like me) to be as important as motorists.  Mobile technology is very important to transit users, and I think we are an important market.  (Does anyone have any numbers?)

It would be great to see Apple bring their famed emphasis on user experience to bear in public transportation.  Google’s already doing an amazing job with transit routing and features on a large-scale.  There is a lot of small-scale innovation going on too.  I hope Apple eventually throws their hat in the ring.

Aaron

-- 
Aaron Antrim

Trillium Solutions, Inc.

www.trilliumtransit.com
Portland, Oregon

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Transit Developers" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/transit-developers/-/BBF7VXqSd30J.
To post to this group, send email to transit-d...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to transit-develop...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transit-developers?hl=en.

[Derrick Brashear]

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Aaron Antrim <aa...@trilliumtransit.com> wrote:

> As Joe said, the Apple's transit app directory will be like a
> platform-specific City-Go-Round.  It will be result in more attention and
> downloads of transit apps.  And more revenue for developers.  This will
> create more innovation.  It is likely that customers will see more and
> better choices for agency and region-specific apps — apps that are tailored
> to specific service features and regional needs.

Of course, no consistency in user experience from city to city. Yes,
it's great that you have
some fantastic idea, but when I leave my city and go to another,
having a different UI and
a different, possibly better, maybe not, set of features, is not really a win.



--
Derrick

[Adam Ernst]

On Jun 13, 2012, at 7:40 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote:
> Of course, no consistency in user experience from city to city. Yes,
> it's great that you have
> some fantastic idea, but when I leave my city and go to another,
> having a different UI and
> a different, possibly better, maybe not, set of features, is not really a win.

On the other hand, systems do have differences. In NYC, you can usually ride multiple trunk lines interchangeably (like the 2/3, 4/5, B/D, etc.). Google Transit doesn't account for this and probably never will since it's such an edge case, but individual system apps can and do.

Adam

[Joa]

On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Brandon Martin-Anderson wrote:

Hey everyone,

(b) How do y'all feel about that?

Aaron eluded to this, but let me drive the point home. With users of iOS based devices cut off from Google Transit, I consider this a ringing endorsement for the public release of transit data beyond exclusive agreements with individual vendors. Assuming they can get into the App Store, yes, it would be great to see Google push out an app on iOS, but even better yet, it would be cool to see an expansion of the public pool of transit data as agencies realize they shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket... Reach leads to shine.

[Joe Hughes]

There's been another round of articles about this today:

http://www.techmeme.com/120618/p7#a120618p7

...following an interesting post by Cocoanetics focusing on the case where transit agencies don't want to publish schedule data for free.  According to them, that's what happened in Vienna:

http://www.cocoanetics.com/2012/06/public-transit-in-ios-6/

Joe

[Richard Kendall Wolf]

Not meaning to start a flame war ... but there is so much wrong with that article ... let me count the ways ... :) :)

> A birdie tweeted into my ear that this was a result of a back-room deal aimed at neutering Google’s power by making Google Maps worthless for navigation in Vienna.

Which "birdie" tweeted the info? ... the chief information officer or the janitor? The weight I apply to the tweet would depend on the answer. :) :) My theory (and it's just that) is that someone mid-level wrote the tweet. I am highly skeptical this person has first-hand knowledge of what really happened ... only vague second-hand kind of knowledge. :)

> The truth of the matter is that if private companies are in charge of public transit and they have vested interests in pushing their own (or partner’s) apps then they have little to no incentive in providing GTFS data to Google.

I've been on this list long enough to have read that loads of public entities behave in exactly the same way (that is, they are reticent to release transit data). I am not clever enough to judge whether privatization is good thing when it comes to public transit ... my only claim here is that this disease seems to affect -both- kinds of transit agency ... private -and- public. I don't see this as "markets are good/bad" kind of thing ... rather I suspect (just suspect ... I don't know) that's it's more of a "we want to control our data" kind of thing.

Also, I am -highly- skeptical that any transit agency expects to make serious money on a local transit app (unless ads are sold within it or something). I'm sure a Vienna transit app could allow a couple of Viennese developers to live a comfortable life, all things being equal ... but we're not talking Angry Birds here. :) I don't see "vested interests" at work trying to undermine Google. :) :)

[Derrick Brashear]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Richard Kendall Wolf <pig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not meaning to start a flame war ... but there is so much wrong with that article ... let me count the ways ... :) :)
>
>> A birdie tweeted into my ear that this was a result of a back-room deal aimed at neutering Google’s power by making Google Maps worthless for navigation in Vienna.
>
> Which "birdie" tweeted the info? ... the chief information officer or the janitor?  The weight I apply to the tweet would depend on the answer.  :) :)  My theory (and it's just that) is that someone mid-level wrote the tweet.  I am highly skeptical this person has first-hand knowledge of what really happened ... only vague second-hand kind of knowledge.  :)

Your disbelief doesn't make the story wrong (or, for that matter
right). But until the data is again available, a self-serving motive
seems likely given that the data is still being generated if you're
special enough to receive it.

--
Derrick

[Richard Kendall Wolf]

I didn't say I "disbelieve" the blog post. :) I said that I'm "skeptical" because its author gives me no evidence that his/her sources are credible. However "skepticism" != "disbelief". :) Skepticism can be a good thing ... it stops you from drawing potentially unwarranted conclusions (e.g., that if data is withheld that there's likely something "self-serving" behind it). Note that I'm not saying this is a good outcome ... just saying that we have -no- idea why things are the way they are. :)

Let's do the math:

According to Wolfram Alpha, just under 1.7 million people live in Vienna.

Let's say each and every resident buys a Viennese public transit app at say ... oh ... ten euros a pop. Seems pricey to me ... but let's grant this just for chuckles. :)

So that's 17 million euros ... maximal revenue in an extreme scenario. That comes to roughly 21.5 million US dollars. This (INHO) would be a -fantastic- outcome for any mobile app developer ... much less a transit app developer targeting a single city. Just crazy awesomely good.

Google's current market cap? ... $186.1 billion ... that's about 8700 times greater.

So I'm extremely skeptical that Google is being undermined by any back-room political deals to do a single mobile app in Vienna (assuming there's any truth to the blogger's claim). Again, I'm not defending anyone here ... just saying be skeptical when reading blogs. :)

[Michael Smith]

I agree that the blog post was impressively shoddy, but for perhaps
different reasons. While the "birdie tweeting" source is quite lame I do
have to say that I have seen agencies restrict their data because they
want to control the situation, to have users go to their own website.
But my experience with this problem is with public agencies, not ones
run by "monopolistic companies". So the writer's conclusions are
completely misplaced. It has nothing to do with private companies
controlling info.

The other key problem with the blog post is the assumption that it was
"smart" for Apple to require companies/agencies to provide individual
trip planning solutions. This completely misses the point of
integration. It takes the view that people are interested in trip
planning for trip planning's sake, when actually they are trying to do
something else (go to a restaurant, work, etc) and trip planning is only
a small factor. If trip planning ends up in a separate application then
they other key factors are lost. Jumping around between applications
just isn't effective nor desirable for users.

I can guarantee that Apple's decision had nothing to do with Vienna. And
based on what is out there with Bing, Google, etc people do not need
"personalized" trip planners. My opinion based on many years of working
with transit agencies and high-tech companies is that Apple is simply
trying to put some sugary frosting on them failing in delivering what
people really want: a multiplicity of excellent integrated solutions.

Michael Smith
GM & CTO
NextBus

On 6/18/2012 1:05 PM, Richard Kendall Wolf wrote:
> Not meaning to start a flame war ... but there is so much wrong with that article ... let me count the ways ... :) :)
>

>> A birdie tweeted into my ear that this was a result of a back-room deal aimed at neutering Google�s power by making Google Maps worthless for navigation in Vienna.

> Which "birdie" tweeted the info? ... the chief information officer or the janitor? The weight I apply to the tweet would depend on the answer. :) :) My theory (and it's just that) is that someone mid-level wrote the tweet. I am highly skeptical this person has first-hand knowledge of what really happened ... only vague second-hand kind of knowledge. :)
>

>> The truth of the matter is that if private companies are in charge of public transit and they have vested interests in pushing their own (or partner�s) apps then they have little to no incentive in providing GTFS data to Google.