What is the value (to Apple) in providing this kind of detail in maps, other than aesthetics? I'm trying to understand why Apple (or any company) would invest money into what seems like a marginal improvement in UX. The city landscape is constantly changing, so there's associated maintainence cost too.
The necessary link between aerial imagery and on-ground navigation by mobile phone is a 3d map.
I'd like to know where the front entrance is vs. the side entrance, is there a ramp vs. stairs, are these two buildings connected or not, is there a skyway, is there a penthouse on the roof, is there a garage behind the main house, etc.
So Google Street View is chopped liver? Flat gray 3D representations don't seem to answer those questions as well as just tooling around the building in Google Street View.
Google's also moving towards adding 3D topography to their maps so I don't quite see what your point is. This isn't an Apple vs Google thing; they're both doing the same things, they just seem to have different priorities about the order in which they do it.
Because this is missing an important point. In order to render the data, the data has to be in a format understood by computers, which street view is not.
Better, more accurate maps are a good incentive to keep people using their platform. It's an incentive to continue using iOS, as now even better maps are built it! (This is my quick off the top logical explanation.)
