Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s look, evolved

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 447 posts

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#391

Post by jvolkman »

kuschku wrote: post #373
qq66 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What changes would you make to Google Maps, with a basic set of assumptions? (let's say, you can't dramatically increase the cost, you can't hurt Google revenue sources, and you have a team of ~20 engineers to work on the changes).

Here some of my current complaints: I (and all my friends) switched to here.com maps after Google has horribly old (2005) data, has a horrible UI, and is generally unusable. In many cities in my region whole districts are completely missing from the maps[1], MapMaker is not available, and in general it’s just a huge mess. Even worse: It loads so slowly (compared to here.com or bing.com or openstreetmap.org) that some…

There's an option to disable 3D in the menu to the left of the search bar.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#392

Post by traviagio »

A turning point in a company's history has to come with rebranding. Otherwise the message won't be as strong. The emotional attachment will fade away with time I am sure. I will miss the logo as well.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#393

Post by kuschku »

jvolkman wrote: post #391
kuschku wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here some of my current complaints: I (and all my friends) switched to here.com maps after Google has horribly old (2005) data, has a horrible UI, and is generally unusable. In many cities in my region whole districts are completely missing from the maps[1], MapMaker is not available, and in general it’s just a huge mess. Even worse: It loads so slowly (compared to here.com or bing.com or openstreetmap.org) that some…

There's an option to disable 3D in the menu to the left of the search bar.

See? That’s one of the largest issues. Totally useless UI, no one finds any option. Thanks, btw, but that still doesn’t fix the satellite imagery from 2005 or the obscenely slow loading times (and extreme performance issues, Google maps is just soooo slow).

I, and everyone I know now switched to here, and we’ll probably stick with that for the next years.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#394

Post by plonh »

teraflop wrote: post #217
mkagenius wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wondering the same. If it has changed, then ISP cache will take some time to reflect.

If your ISP is caching HTTPS requests, you have a problem.

CDNs get copies of SSL keys so they can do their job: serving data. They are logically part of the serving infrastructure for example.com

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#395

Post by lysium »

qq66 wrote: post #206
DanBC wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google maps is incredibly frustrating to use. I can't understand what user testing they do.

What changes would you make to Google Maps, with a basic set of assumptions? (let's say, you can't dramatically increase the cost, you can't hurt Google revenue sources, and you have a team of ~20 engineers to work on the changes).

It's mostly functionality that was available in earlier versions, but I cannot find it anymore (or is it gone?):

- goo.gl-Link to this map

- Terrain-mode

- collapse white search box w/o loosing all entered data

- enter 'from:xxx to:yyy' for navigation

- extra stops (routing)

The best thing about maps that I really love (and why I am willing to fight with the UI) is the address recognition: I can put almost anything into the search box and it will find the address I had in mind. No street/city separation, no extra box for businesses, no strict order of name, address, zip code, city. And if it's unclear to maps, the suggestions almost always include what I had in mind.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#396

Post by plonh »

lancewiggs wrote: post #279
qq66 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What changes would you make to Google Maps, with a basic set of assumptions? (let's say, you can't dramatically increase the cost, you can't hurt Google revenue sources, and you have a team of ~20 engineers to work on the changes).

Stop pretending you don't know where I am when I'm not logged in. I'm not going to log-in as I don't trust you, but I know you know who I am anyway.

If you know they know who you are why don't you log in, and if you don't trust them then why do you use the site at all

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#397

Post by plonh »

kuschku wrote: post #372
krick wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, are there good web maps? OSM is much worse, for instance. Google maps are pretty usable by comparison.

I (and all my friends) switched to here.com maps after Google has horribly old (2005) data, has a horrible UI, and is generally unusable. In many cities in my region whole districts are completely missing from the maps[1], MapMaker is not available, and in general it’s just a huge mess. Even worse: It loads so slowly (compared to here.com or bing.com or openstreetmap.org) that sometimes it takes several minutes to lo…

Apropros of the other Google thread today, the here.com link completely fails: it shows an full screen ad for the mobile app, with no way to get to the map.

Re: Google’s look, evolved

#398

Post by Whitespace »

qq66 wrote: post #206
DanBC wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google maps is incredibly frustrating to use. I can't understand what user testing they do.

What changes would you make to Google Maps, with a basic set of assumptions? (let's say, you can't dramatically increase the cost, you can't hurt Google revenue sources, and you have a team of ~20 engineers to work on the changes).

- Stop forcing users to sign into google maps mobile just to save their home/work directions. They took that option away and it's infuriating to old farts like me that I will _deliberately have a worse experience_ just so I don't have to sign in

- Stop hijacking basic user interactions like the mouse click. On desktop, if you click the map it will reverse geocode where you clicked (and show you the nearest road to it.) Although I understand the utility of such a feature, I have never ever wanted that. I live in NYC and no one has a car. I just want to change focus off of the constantly expanding and moving navigation window thing. I search for something, then click the background, and now my search is gone. Then I click the location area to get my search back, and nothing happens. I click the background to get rid of the stupid useless direction window, and now everything is gone. Oh, except the thing I clicked is now reverse geocoded for me. Infuriating.

- I challenge people to do the following on desktop: share a location in the middle of a park (hint: drop a pin first)

Post reply on HN