Maps feature?

Hawk

Genius
Gold
Aug 2, 2007
6,682
241
83
49
ATL
#21
I live in Gainesville, Florida so there is a lot of wifi downtown but i never go there so i would by the cingular wifi.
The "Cingular WiFi", which is now AT&T, is a cellular service. It uses what's called an "air card" that is for Laptops. Since it works off the cellular service, the iPod touch cannot use it. The iPod touch can only use WiFi hotspots such as those found in coffee houses, hotels, public libraries, and home networks. There are a few places in the country that offer "City Wide" actual WiFI service, but those are few and far between, and you still have to pay for them.
The AT&T Edge network (which runs off the cellular GSM signal) is the most complete "all over" network of it's kind in the country. Yes, there are faster networks, but the coverage is comparatively very small, and if you don't live inside a major metropolitan area, chances are that you cannot get connected anyway.
If you are looking for an internet iPod that can go just about anywhere, get the iPhone. If you are looking for an iPod that can access the internet wirelessly- where signals are available (and hopefully free) get the Touch.
 

Saurabh

New Member
Bronze
Sep 5, 2007
152
0
0
VA
#22
Well its great if your not lost, If you have starting point and an End. Otherwise without GPS its pretty crippled.
 

erroneous

New Member
Bronze
Jun 23, 2007
107
0
0
#23
Maps Feature

I always get a kick out of how the original theme of a thread
gets bent to some other topic.

Anyway... I actually have seen a difference between
using the Maps Feature on the iPhone verses accessing it via
a computer.

Do a search of where you live for example on your iPhone Maps.

And do a search of the same address using your computer.

The Push Pin doesn't always pick the very same spot on the map.

Sure, it might only be off a block or two, but... they are...
or can give different results.

wonder why that is

(Well, I don't wonder that much about it.)

John
 
Aug 2, 2007
1,745
52
48
Long Island N.Y.
#24
Maps

to be honest, i actually find the maps feature is the most useful thing on this iPhone (at least to me). too bad it doesn't have GPS.

Whats also great about the maps feature is you never have to call information again, all phone numbers come up in your google search, no more paying a buck for a 411 call....wooohooo we get to screw the phone company a little.
 

luvmyiphone25

New Member
Bronze
Jul 8, 2007
48
0
0
#25
Whats also great about the maps feature is you never have to call information again, all phone numbers come up in your google search, no more paying a buck for a 411 call....wooohooo we get to screw the phone company a little.

i use the map feature all the time to look up numbers. its great and u never have to listen to the annoying 411 operator again
 

Hawk

Genius
Gold
Aug 2, 2007
6,682
241
83
49
ATL
#26
i use the map feature all the time to look up numbers. its great and u never have to listen to the annoying 411 operator again
You can also kind of do that on the web (google is only about 60% correct for me so far)
ANY phone number on a webpage, even any 10 digit string, the phone can dial if you tap it.
We had a friend leave his cell charger in his room after checking out. We were about 20 minutes away, and we've been gone for about an hour or so. I used the map feature and the listed phone number was wrong- so was the site address. Looked them up through regular google and found them, and the number was on the front page. I tapped it, and it called them.
The charger was waiting for us when we got there.
 

Prelector

Member
Bronze
Sep 6, 2007
151
1
18
#27
Unless they have launched a new satellite with 12" resolution, this would be impossible. Now, a lot of the close up views you'll find on Google Maps are actually taken with aircraft. Then it MIGHT be possible to get down to 12" resolution, but I really doubt it. I don't think the cameras they use for these images offer that high of a resolution.
Google Maps are actually an interpolation of 3 types of data: Sat imaging, Aerial imaging, and GIS data sets (any other computer based data, including scanned maps and computer modeling). As such, the actual satellite optical resolution is much lower than the final product we see.

And Google Maps today offers resolutions as accurate as 6" in certain areas, based on data available. In fact, Google could offer 6" resolution of the entire planet, without ever increasing the optical resolution of satellite imagery. All they really have to do is incorporate new Aerial imaging data, along with the continuing declassification of military satellite imaging.

Finally, Google doesn't own or launch any satellites. Google maps is a presentation of the Keyhole, Inc. Earth Viewer system.
 

SmartAlx

Zealot
Gold
Jun 7, 2007
1,087
8
38
#28
Google Maps are actually an interpolation of 3 types of data: Sat imaging, Aerial imaging, and GIS data sets (any other computer based data, including scanned maps and computer modeling). As such, the actual satellite optical resolution is much lower than the final product we see.
Right, that's what I meant when I said that Google incorporates photos from Airplanes.
And Google Maps today offers resolutions as accurate as 6" in certain areas, based on data available.
Not arguing or anything, but could you show me an example (link) of a place that Google offers at 6" resolution? I don't think I've seen any Google images taken with that high of a resolution. That would be interesting to see.
In fact, Google could offer 6" resolution of the entire planet, without ever increasing the optical resolution of satellite imagery. All they really have to do is incorporate new Aerial imaging data
So Aerial imaging can get as high as 6"? That's pretty darn good.
along with the continuing declassification of military satellite imaging.
I didn't realize that any (recent) military satellite data was declassified. Do you have a cite for this position? Considering the simple fact that even the actual resolution of the military satellites is classified, I can't imagine that they would allow any current military satellite data to be released. That would make the resolution easy to figure out.
Finally, Google doesn't own or launch any satellites. Google maps is a presentation of the Keyhole, Inc. Earth Viewer system.
I hope my use of the word "they" in "Unless they have launched a new satellite with 12" resolution" didn't make you think that I assumed that Google had satellites. I am quite aware that Google doesn't have satellites and I always assumed that they use images from publicly available sources elsewhere.
 

Prelector

Member
Bronze
Sep 6, 2007
151
1
18
#29
Right, that's what I meant when I said that Google incorporates photos from Airplanes.Not arguing or anything, but could you show me an example (link) of a place that Google offers at 6" resolution? I don't think I've seen any Google images taken with that high of a resolution. That would be interesting to see.
Las Vegas, NV and Cambridge, MA are 2 cities with areas of up to 6" resolution. (though it appears that this level of resolution is only available through the stand alone Google Earth application)

So Aerial imaging can get as high as 6"? That's pretty darn good.
Depends on the camera you use, and how low you fly, but yes. My point, though, was that the majority of the google maps resolution actually comes from data interpolation. In effect, the system guesses based on the imaging data given it. Much the same way digital zoom works on a camera, only MUCH better quality.

I didn't realize that any (recent) military satellite data was declassified. Do you have a cite for this position?
It's not a position, it's merely a statement. And all of the info I've given here can be readily found via research on the internet. However, This NRO doc details the release of Corona based imaging in 1997 as one example. In addition, the NIMA program "Imagery for Citizens", while not online yet, is an attempt at ongoing declassification of military imaging. Finally, the Russian government has recently released previously classified satellite imagery at up to 2m resolution. (Look for Russion Spin-2)

Considering the simple fact that even the actual resolution of the military satellites is classified, I can't imagine that they would allow any current military satellite data to be released. That would make the resolution easy to figure out.
This isn't accurate. Currently operating military satellite capability, and recent generation tech, is classified, yes. But decommissioned technology isn't classified anymore. The most recently declassified satellite, the KH11, was last launched in 1990, and is still believed to be in operation today. The KH11 had a theoretical resolution of .15m (6inches) but operational resolution due to atmospheric conditions would be closer to 2m-3m.

The key point to keep in mind here, is that improved map resolution is only barely based on actual optics technology. Most of the improved resolution is due to much more accurate and efficient extrapolation software systems. Actual optic pictures are used more to add resolution in areas with a poor data set, to verify the accuracy of the software systems, and to add new terresterial features (roads, houses, etc).