If Apple does switch to their own maps, I'm sure Google will come out with their own independent Google Maps app in the App Store, like they have for Google+ and other products.
If nothing else, their database of businesses is hugely valuable and useful in its own app (it's what I use the Maps app for most and I don't think Apple will be able to fully replace it, at least not with the first iteration).
> If Apple does switch to their own maps, I'm sure Google will come out with their own independent Google Maps app in the App Store, like they have for Google+ and other products.
I thought Apple does not allow apps competing with the "core" apps.
That rule was dropped a long time ago. AFAIK, the only remaining restriction is using Safari's rendering engine for browser apps.
Examples:
* Opera vs Safari.app
* Sparrow vs Mail.app
* Vimeo vs YouTube app
* Agenda vs Calendar.app
* Kik vs Messages.app
* Simplenote vs Notes.app
(I believe it came out that that "rule" was only used as an excuse for Apple to delay the Google Voice app. After they finally agreed to let Google Voice on the App Store a year later, I don't think I've ever seen anyone complain about it.)
It's actually not the rendering engine but interpretation of code downloaded from the netwOrk (i.e. JavaScript) which must use Apple's interpreter. That interpreter happens to be tied into their browser, so using it for other things is impractical.
Mapquest 4 Mobile and Maps+ are both in the app store...so I would doubt that this would be the case. I believe that clause of "duplication" is not enforced anymore.
If nothing else, their database of businesses is hugely valuable and useful in its own app (it's what I use the Maps app for most and I don't think Apple will be able to fully replace it, at least not with the first iteration).