I am pretty sure using a maps app is more like visiting maps.google.de in a browser, that is, it would be free. The pricing link you gave is for embedding Google Maps into your product. If anything, I suspect Google paid Apple to keep maps on the iPhone, and now Apple's demands were getting too much.

Yes the consumer web offering is free (and includes Google ads) and is still available through the browser on iOS 6.

You are wrong about the revenue direction. Apple were a significant provider of revenue to Google for map usage. Below is just the article I picked but Googling for 'google maps ios revenue' brings up quite a number.

http://www.ijailbreak.com/news/apple-ios-40-google-mobile-re...

I suspect Apple were upset at the limitations believed to be imposed on them by the Google contract (no turn by turn) and it was expiring anyway. It was probably negotiated when they had no idea how sucessful the iPhone was going to be. Google probably also wanted more control to insert advertising and the fact the two firms are now competitors in mobile OS's and at legal loggerheads made agreement unlikely.

If what you say is true – which I have to disagree with: If you built a third-party Maps app that duplicates the functionality, you would most certainly be subject to API fees – there is the secondary issue of Apple allowing Maps (and Youtube, for that matter) to completely stagnate. The iOS 5 version of Maps was still a pretty poor experience for the timeframe, even if you feel it was better than the new version.

What incentive was there for Google to back Apple's poor implementations when they can just release their own versions that actually bring the features Google wants to offer their customers on their own schedule, as they are doing now?

Nobody seems to have provided any quotes or citations yet that indicate that Apple had to pay Google.

Such a maps app is more like a browser visiting maps.google.com - browser vendors also don't pay for doing that.

Embedding a map with a search field in an HTML page is no different than maps.google.com either, but you will be subject to the API terms because those are the terms Google has decided upon. They could ask browser vendors to pay too, if they wanted to, but have chosen not to. They chose to charge those who implement software using their API. A Maps app like Apple's, which does far more than pointing to maps.google.com, needs to use the API service, which Google has decided to charge a fee for. Granted, Apple could have struck an independent deal with Google to use the service without said fee. That, we will never know.

But what reason would Apple have to go out of their way to maintain their own datasource (and pay other vendors, like TomTom, for help) if Google's data already fit the bill? Even more so if Apple was going to be paid to use it as you speculate. A dislike for Android isn't reason enough, especially as this move strengthens Androids position for the time being. The only logical explanation is that Google wasn't willing to play ball, for one reason or another.

The real value of the maps apps is collecting data about user's behavior and movement patterns. Apple don't get that if they use a third party app.

Apple still had access to that data while using Google as a provider. That wouldn't justify the switch at all.

> I suspect Google paid Apple to keep maps on the iPhone, and now Apple's demands were getting too much.

Good example of that weird "Google can do no wrong even though it's a company built on collecting information about users and selling it" nerd mentality. It's well known that Google was increasing it's map fees.