91–100 of 156 posts
Holy shit it's awesome! I've been bikepaking for two years now and I wish I had this tool I've used komoot in the past but I was never satisfied with the paths it suggested and had to rely on local guides I've checked with some of the past trips I id and it guesses correctly all of the best paths
Looks interesting! Unfortunately doesn't seem to let me add more than one point on my route. In the console I see `Error fetching route from Graphhopper Error: Network response was not ok` I tried a couple times and got this in the U.S. In Europe I picked a couple random points and it worked fine.
What I really want form a bike route planner is a map style that shows smaller roads as you zoom out. When planning a cycling I'm interested in tiny back back roads but they are hidden as soon as I zoom out on any map enough to be useful for route planning.
cycle.travel (my site) aims to do that - the advantage of developing your own cartography! Minor roads in rural areas are shown earlier than in most other styles, but in urban areas they kick in later to avoid cluttering the map too much.
One little feature that's great is the quick link to view Google Streetview images, and the only thing I'd change is to have it let me do that anywhere on the map (not just on the route) so that I can look at alternatives without dragging the route there first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A subscription? $10 a month?? That's the cost of a music streaming service!! I'd spend up to a $100 once on a killer tool that meets all my needs in this space. This subscription first crap is way out of hand.
Except that if you're a serious cyclist, spending $10/month on a really good road mapping service is worth more to you than spending $10/month on a music streaming service (or 2 coffees at Starbucks).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since this is getting downvoted, I'd sure like to hear why you think an app like this justifies a $10/mo sub.
$10 per month is the minimum price that you should use for any software or digital product. People who are unwilling to pay $10 per month are also unwilling to pay $5 per month or $1 per month – regardless of how much value they get from the product. Ten dollars is the bottom. Why should it be a subscription instead of a pay-once app? Maps have to update as the real world updates, and probably they have other feature…
I'm paying for $1 and $5 subscriptions (ko-fi) for things I like and use. But $10 is getting too high for a thing even though I use it every day. Within five months I'm already past the value of my bike. I need that money to change parts to be able to continue biking.
What I ususally do is a one-month subscription to support. Then I turn it off for the rest of the year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since this is getting downvoted, I'd sure like to hear why you think an app like this justifies a $10/mo sub.
I didn't downvote you FYI, but to answer your question, I run ridewithgps and as a result have a pretty in depth understanding of all the costs involved. We have 14 machines in a rack at a datacenter in PDX, and have focused on low hosting costs since we have historically been bootstrapped and margin sensitive. Redundant switches, 2 firewall/load balancers, 4 compute machines, 3 database machines, 5 storage servers.…
I have also worked with gps data and run my own map server (for a small country) so I know it costs money, time and effort. And thanks for the breakdown!
What I really want form a bike route planner is a map style that shows smaller roads as you zoom out. When planning a cycling I'm interested in tiny back back roads but they are hidden as soon as I zoom out on any map enough to be useful for route planning.
cycle.travel (my site) aims to do that - the advantage of developing your own cartography! Minor roads in rural areas are shown earlier than in most other styles, but in urban areas they kick in later to avoid cluttering the map too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I frequently use RWGPS for planning my bike rides but don't pay for it (yet!). Curious - is all routing done by graphhopper or do you have some secret sauce on your end? Also graphhopper web has regular bike mode and "racing bike", they tend to come up with different routes, wondering if it's incorporated on your side somehow or if there is a way to influence RWGPS algorithm to be more "road cycling" vs casual cyclin…
We have an update to our web and mobile route planners coming out in the next month that adds more specific bike profiles, including paved/unpaved preferences and cycling infrastructure preferences. Maybe an MTB profile as well. We use graphhopper for everything, with customized profiles. We add data to the weekly planet PBF files from the OSM project for additional routing data not present in OSM.
Sorry, forgot to mention. The planner is a mess on mobile I totally forgot to make it mobile friendly as I didn't think anyone would want to plan their trip on a phone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since this is getting downvoted, I'd sure like to hear why you think an app like this justifies a $10/mo sub.
$10 per month is the minimum price that you should use for any software or digital product. People who are unwilling to pay $10 per month are also unwilling to pay $5 per month or $1 per month – regardless of how much value they get from the product. Ten dollars is the bottom. Why should it be a subscription instead of a pay-once app? Maps have to update as the real world updates, and probably they have other feature…
For me to sign up with a 3rd party service to pay a subscription: yes, $10/month is probably the smallest fee I'd bother with.
To add a subscription through my Apple devices, where I can manage my apps in a single pane of glass and start/stop subscriptions at will, I'm fine with paying $10/year, $2/month, whatever.