Google also has a giant lead in trails / feature names. I hike a ton and Google has been adding trails at a brisk pace. I just checked the Snoqualmie Pass area about an hour outside of Seattle and Apple Maps has almost no trails, named mountains or named lakes (even quite large ones). A few trails show up as unnamed roads. There's also no relief shading to tell where the mountains are or a terrain view for contour lines.
Google Maps' Moat
111–120 of 619 posts
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good point, the map is not the territory and the cars are engaging with the territory. Another interesting thing to consider, should there be widespread use of autonomous vehicles is the absolutely massive deployment of digital sensors that would entail, and who would use this data and to what ends? It would basically be realtime Streetview.
There's a fairly steady stream of posts here about data/privacy/etc. It's easy to pillory companies for violating privacy rules in various ways or mishandling data. However, given that data can't be reliably anonymized and that a lot of things that happen in public have simply never been systematically recorded in the past, there are a lot of fundamental questions over what sorts of data should be recorded when they…
If it's the type of autonomous cars that are prototyped today, they are definitely going to be dependent on invasive data collection.
Does it get sent back to the mothership? How is it processed? Is it discarded? Who has access?
When data is the new oil, these questions answer themselves if there is not legislation to prevent it.
Such data would be hugely attractive for commercial interests.
Hedge-funds and the like, use aerial imagery to get data like the amount of cars in parking lots at shopping areas.
With a fleet of cars with 360 degree cameras driving around, not only could the number of people on the sidewalks be counted, but it would be technically possible to identify most of them.
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#113I accidentally used Apple Maps once as I was going to a (new) doctor's office. I realized I was using Apple maps halfway through my drive and I joked with myself that it wouldn't bring me to the right place. I was heading to a fairly large medical complex in Orange County (CA) and I sort-of had an idea of where I was going anyway, but boy, was I wrong. According to Apple maps, the doctor's office was literally in the…
Interestingly, Apple maps seems to have more accurate maps in some places like Chiang Mai, Thailand. I've noticed locals there using Maps instead of Google Maps
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#114I'm still wondering why Waze doesn't incorporate Google Maps data and Google Maps doesn't incorporate Waze traffic data? Or does this already happen since Google has owned Waze for a while now? If not, I find it strange for the two to continue to be silo'd.
I've heard stories, guesses, and claims that the current traffic data shown on google maps is potentially aggregated from smartphone GPS and accelerometer readings on android phones or though their Google apps. It's crazy and amazing to just think about it.
I always thought this was officially a feature of maps ?
I worked for a couple of years in a valley with only 2 access points.
Quite often, when it is time to go back home, the trafic would be jammed.
I activated Google Now (or at least I think it was already called that way ?) and without fail it would warn me that there is no point in leaving the building right now since everything was jammed.
The same info was visible on maps.
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#115Great article, but it has me thinking: what is holding Apple back? My ideas: - Apple is just a few years behind; they launched a decade later. Come back in 3 years and they'll be close to parity. - Apple only needs Maps to be good enough to avoid PR disaster, since they need a reasonable default on iOS. On the other hand Google needs to be good enough to beat competitors since they want to make money on traffic, usag…
>Apple is just a few years behind; they launched a decade later. Come back in 3 years and they'll be close to parity.
So you expect Google to stand around for 3 or more years while Apple comes close to parity with Google today?
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the wrong way to think about things. Competition is good. If it weren't for the need to compete, would Google have spent billions on innovations like Street View, Satellite imagery, Google Earth, etc. Or would they have just said, "MapQuest has won the internet maps game, let's just let MapQuest do their own thing. No use in doing the same work twice,"
I think you slightly missed the parent comment's point, which is not that they should have walked away but rather have said "man, we really want better maps and imaging for navigation, MapQuest has a great head start, we should work with them to make it even better". I'm not sure what economic model encourages that sort of behavior, though.
Agreed. Yet this sort of sharing has happened in some fields - for example, with game engines. Which I never thought I'd see, way back when. The best of these now tend to be opened up (for royalties.) Perhaps that needs to have more regulatory or government encouragement; although like yourself I'm not quite sure how to do that and still keep incentives in place. Particularly where only one or two firms are really competitive.
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#117These building footprints, complete with height detail, are algorithmically created by taking aerial imagery and using computer vision techniques to render the building shapes. I could have guessed that before the punchline. And it's not that difficult to add for a company with tens of billions in cash. What are you doing, Apple? Fix your OS and Maps!
You need aerial imagery from different angles. Thats surprisingly hard to buy from imagery providers, because most of them only want to point their cameras directly downwards.
Do we know how Google obtains this data ?
Could drones be used here ? It looks like it would be a good way to refresh this data often on the cheap.
(drone is the loosest sense, a balloon would do the trick)
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#118Is there a reason anyone uses Apple Maps, aside from wanting to avoid Google out of principle/privacy/monoculture concerns? To be clear, these are entirely legitimate reasons, but I was wondering if the product has any direct benefits for the user (which is a coherent subset of reasons given the modal users' level of concern about systemic issues). I'm not trying to randomly snipe at Apple here, I just know very litt…
Google Maps doesn't work well at all on one of my Macs. In Safari, the 2D view works, but the 3D view doesn't work. In Chrome, the satellite tiles are all black (but the roads are visible). In Firefox, the satellite and roads are both black. It's the same (and most recent) version of all these browsers as my other Mac, where it works fine. How does one debug this? I've tried googling (ha) for every combination of wor…
Sounds like a problem with webgl? Try lite mode https://www.google.com/maps/@?force=lite&dg=dbrw&newdg=1.
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#119Things like this make me think that it's a shame humanity is duplicating all this work instead of collaborating to do it once. One of the awkward failures of capitalism, I guess. At least when your product is something physical you end up with twice as many outputs. When it's just data you just do the same work twice.
> One of the awkward failures of capitalism, I guess. No, it's actually a feature: competition. With a single product in every category it would be impossible to have diversity of ideas being tested and competing. It is the same with evolution.
Not so fast! Competition only makes sense if you’re competing on the right things.
Railroads should compete on service, quality and price. They should not compete by laying down parallel tracks side by side.
Some things should be shared in common and competitive services built on top.
Re: Google Maps' Moat
#120Google Maps, Apple Maps, and Bing Maps will all try to murder you if you ask for directions from Santa Maria, CA to Ventura, CA.
The obvious route is to follow the freeway that was built on the best route between the two cities. Instead, all three really enjoy routing you onto a two-lane twisty mountain road that is five minutes shorter if you are driving a sports car and all the lights are green. Heaven help you if you are driving an RV.
I've sent corrections to both Google and Apple about this. They both did nothing.