Google Maps on Windows Phone Disabled?

E Lizzle

New member
Nov 26, 2012
236
0
0
Visit site
Speaking of news -- looks like Google blinked. They claim that they turned off maps because they hadn't tried it with IE 9 or IE 10. (Laughable nonsense, but still, let 'em have their fig leaf).

Google says Maps redirect on Windows Phone was a product decision, and will be removed - The Next Web

Hopefully, this little episode will build up some skepticism about Google from a tech media that's always been all-too-willing to swallow whatever bowl of codswallop that it offers them.

And when the WP users who haven't been there yet are finally able to get on it, and they see the confusion between how movement and zoom events are digested by either the page or the map itself, everyone will wonder why they ever cared about this issue. Google Maps has to be rolled into an app to be usable on a phone.

-E
 

arrowrand

New member
Dec 13, 2012
142
0
0
Visit site
Plenty of people have legacy data, like saved points of interest, locked inside the Google Ghetto. Time to break 'em free, before they go gulag again!
You're not even trying any more.

1. You can't export anything from any Google Mobile website. You'd need a desktop browser because the desktop Maps site won't load on WP. Never was blocked there.
2. Google used to provide a KML file download of your saved places, and may still. So, even if you could access it on your phone, your browser won't download it. You need a desktop. Never was blocked there.
3. Even if your browser on WP did download it, when did Bing Maps start supporting KML import? You need a pen and paper. Easier to do on a desktop. Never was blocked there.

I still don't get how the peasants stuck in the ghetto got any kind of reprieve here. Saved locations always were available to any user, on the desktop. Even in IE.

Your trolling used to almost make sense. Now, you're reaching. Besides, as much hatred as you have for Google and love for Microsoft, you should be thrilled that there isn't a full Google Experience on WP8.
 

arrowrand

New member
Dec 13, 2012
142
0
0
Visit site
Such "logic" by Google strikes me as flawed and self-serving, but what do I know? I'm part of the 25% who don't use Android. :winktongue:
You apparently don't know much. The only thing that OS level APIs and YouTube APIs have in common is the use of the API acronym.

OS level APIs allow applications to interact with the operating system. YouTube, Google Maps, Bing Maps and every other Web service's APIs allow apps to access content. Copyrightable? Not the point because copyright isn't the issue.

Google didn't tell Roku that "you're violating our patents" with your YouTube app, nor did they tell them that "you're violating our copyright". They told them "you're violating our Terms of Service". That's probably the same exact thing that MS was told in regards to their YouTube app.

API access to any Web service is owned and controlled by whoever owns that site. If you want access to public APIs to benefit your own platform, follow the TOS like every other company that wants access has to do.
 

brmiller1976

New member
Aug 5, 2011
2,092
0
0
Visit site
I'm always pleased when a Google fan tells me my comments "don't make sense" and are "trolling" -- and takes the time to reply quite snappily.

It indicates that my core point is valid enough to warrant a passionate defense of the Mothership.

API access to any Web service is owned and controlled by whoever owns that site.

Unless it is a patented API that Google wants to add to its own products (like Android) without paying for it, in which case, Google whines that the IP is "unfairly constraining competition."

In GoogleWorld, Apple's scrolling algorithms and Microsoft's file integrity subroutines are something they should be able to cut-n-paste into Android for free... but APIs accessing a video stream on a web site are Sacrosanct Private Property that Google alone should have access to.

The wide-eyed earnestness of the hypocrisy is a novelty, but it doesn't change the fact that Google's argument (which you're regurgitating) is "nobody but Google should have IP rights, and Google's IP rights should be absolute."
 

arrowrand

New member
Dec 13, 2012
142
0
0
Visit site
brmiller1976 said:
The wide-eyed earnestness of the hypocrisy is a novelty, but it doesn't change the fact that Google's argument (which you're regurgitating) is "nobody but Google should have IP rights, and Google's IP rights should be absolute."
Only, that's not what I said. At all.
Make it up as you go along.
 

E Lizzle

New member
Nov 26, 2012
236
0
0
Visit site
Unless it is a patented API that Google wants to add to its own products (like Android) without paying for it, in which case, Google whines that the IP is "unfairly constraining competition."

In GoogleWorld, Apple's scrolling algorithms and Microsoft's file integrity subroutines are something they should be able to cut-n-paste into Android for free... but APIs accessing a video stream on a web site are Sacrosanct Private Property that Google alone should have access to.

You're confusing the literal API spec itself with an API call. Oracle v Google, for example, was about the literal API. The MS Youtube issue is about using an API to access data housed at Google. It's a different situation. What MS really wants is access to Google's data and that is what Google is denying.

-E

PS - I am not in any way defending Google's position. It annoys the heck out of me.
 

bawboh86

New member
Sep 14, 2012
572
0
0
Visit site
Honestly, I don't feel like it's much of a loss. So long as I have some access to maps, I'm going to find a way to my destination, and google maps's web experience on a phone hasn't been my fave anyways. I like Nokia Drive's ability to get lots of huge maps at once, too. I don't know, I feel like people are blowing it all out of proportion anyways.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,263
Messages
2,243,540
Members
428,051
Latest member
kuyhaa