For what it's worth, there's still no word from Gruber and Siegler on how they never noticed any problems with maps when they were writing their original reviews.
It's completely easy to not notice any problems, particularly after only a week of use. The Macalope's been using iOS 6 for more than a week and he's not seen any. Meanwhile, he can detail any number of times he got lousy directions from Google's map data ... because he used it for five years and in a variety of locations.
Sadly, the Venn diagram circles of "reasonable expectations" and "Dan Lyons screed" do not intersect.
Steve is dead, but the reality distortion field lives on.
And Fake Steve is dead, but the self-important drama queen lives on.
Saturday Special: There's never anything good on
Let us turn now to the hallowed pages of The Wall Street Journal to get away from all this "Steve Jobs would never..." hooey and instead look at some other hooey.
Apple had snafus under Steve Jobs-antenna-gate, MobileMe, the frequently obtuse Siri.
Yay! Finally someone's not desperately shoving things under the couch cushions in order to make an incorrect, hackneyed point about things that "never would have happened under Steve Jobs."
However much it might benefit Apple's business model to force users to patronize its own maps app, the company won't get far in trying to deny them Google's far superior app.
Again, though, the conflation of "data" with "app." The current Maps app is quite nice. The data stinks. When Google gets around to shipping its own app, what you'll get is the opposite: great data with a lousy app.
Apple is frustrated because there is no solution to TV that will let Apple keep doing what it has been doing.
Well, there is a solution, it's just a question of when the studios will see that.
Apple's fans imagine the company can do for TV what it did for music: breaking up the existing distribution model. Forget about it.
Jenkins does not exactly say why the two are so different. They just are. And you Apple fans are dumb to want things. And Apple's dumb to try to do them. The end.
Video-content owners aren't looking for a savior and ultimately won't be satisfied with anything less than an open ecosystem accessible by any device.
Uh, no. Actually, what they're interested in is making you watch ads or making you pay for crappy content by bundling lousy shows together with good shows. In short, they're interested in foisting a sub-par user experience on their "consumers" because their ideal of how this should work is best exemplified by that eyeball scene in A Clockwork Orange.
Sign up for Computerworld eNewsletters.