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

Farewell, Google Maps

inderapotheke.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 545 posts

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#281

Post by exhilaration »

voltagex_ wrote: post #104
woohoo7676 wrote: post #35

I work for a startup that has mapping/routing as one of its core needs - about a year or two ago we decided that our reliance on Google's mapping APIs was too great and decided to work on having a switchable backup provider in case something like this should ever happen. With auto complete especially, we would have had a 10-20x increase in pricing (and this is with an 'enterprise' plan pricing). As the article says,…

Writing a mapping abstraction layer is tricky - mostly because Google Maps does things differently than other providers. Can you share any details?

No need to write it yourself - the article mentions using Leaflet https://leafletjs.com/ for just such a purpose.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#282

Post by _Codemonkeyism »

ajross wrote: post #111
tobltobs wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thought the same, there are not many use cases which will be still profitable after this price increase.

Counterpoint: if these startups need a giant subsidized mapping product for free or else they aren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable . I mean, there's a real cry-me-a-river aspect here. No one has a Google-granted fundamental right to mapping. It's a free product Google released to drive traffic to their own offerings, and which they happen to make available for free for a lot of purposes. As it turns out, y…

If a startup needs a giant system of subsidized roads for free or else they aren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable.

You see where this argument leads to?

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#283

Post by rurban »

apatters wrote: post #254
ericd wrote: post #7

"Sudden change of policy by Google, which is directed specifically at startups (as smaller web sites should largely remain below even the new lower thresholds), is surely an unpleasant surprise for us and does not create much trust in Google as a vendor. In the future we would therefore keep our distance from Google Cloud and avoid deep integration with any Google services on which it can pull a similar trick. For ex…

The pricing change is understandably very frustrating for users of Google Maps who are affected, but it seems like a big win to me for everyone in the mapping market. Google is trading away a monopoly position (and related regulatory risk) in exchange for increased revenue so it's a win for them. It's a win for other mappers because now they can compete on price. It's a win for users because they are getting more cho…

But the other mapping services will very soon adjust their prices also. It makes no sense to be 10x cheaper than Google when 2x cheaper does the same.

I still have to understand openstreetmap mapping solutions. It's named open, not free, so I guess providing your own server with osm data would work. Only with FreeStreetMap the data would be infected also.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#284

Post by jayd16 »

hueving wrote: post #278
ajross wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: if these startups need a giant subsidized mapping product for free or else they aren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable . I mean, there's a real cry-me-a-river aspect here. No one has a Google-granted fundamental right to mapping. It's a free product Google released to drive traffic to their own offerings, and which they happen to make available for free for a lot of purposes. As it turns out, y…

>Counterpoint: if these startups need a giant subsidized mapping product for free or else they aren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable. If startups need a giant subsidized operating system for free or else they weren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable. Do you see how ridiculous that argument is? >As it turns out, yeah, there's a lot of value we as a society can derive from low cost pervasive mapping.…

>Do you see how ridiculous that argument is?

What? Your counter-counterpoint doesn't make sense at. Lots of startups can afford the per seat cost of OSX or Windows. If your business can't recoup the cost of an os per employee then yeah...maybe it's not a worthwhile venture.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#285

Post by da_chicken »

wwweston wrote: post #16
ericd wrote: post #7

"Sudden change of policy by Google, which is directed specifically at startups (as smaller web sites should largely remain below even the new lower thresholds), is surely an unpleasant surprise for us and does not create much trust in Google as a vendor. In the future we would therefore keep our distance from Google Cloud and avoid deep integration with any Google services on which it can pull a similar trick. For ex…

While I've experienced the frustration of having a formerly free service develop paid tiers (and policies that put me in those tiers), of all the changes a software service can make, this is the one that frustrates me the least, or at any rate less than: * shutting down the service entirely because the user base never grew into customers who actually valued the service * changing your terms of service to forbid an ac…

> A big price bump with a few months notice is painful (and I'm glad it's bringing competition), but it tells me they're thinking seriously about how to sustain/develop the product and lets both them and me explore the real value of the service.

It tells me they're trying to minimize the number of users (which reduces their costs) by raising the price while still making it profitable. They raise prices rapidly to see how many people jump ship, and when your revenue begins to decline you've gone a bit too far.

Of course, they've done it very quickly, so they've likely not allowed enough time for the competition to step in or all their customers to abandon your now-expensive product.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#287

Post by da_chicken »

ajross wrote: post #111
tobltobs wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thought the same, there are not many use cases which will be still profitable after this price increase.

Counterpoint: if these startups need a giant subsidized mapping product for free or else they aren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable . I mean, there's a real cry-me-a-river aspect here. No one has a Google-granted fundamental right to mapping. It's a free product Google released to drive traffic to their own offerings, and which they happen to make available for free for a lot of purposes. As it turns out, y…

> Counterpoint: if these startups need a giant subsidized mapping product for free or else they aren't profitable, they weren't ever profitable.

I mean, kind of, but on the other hand, think about all the companies whose costs are subsidized by having public roads.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#288

Post by synesso »

voltagex_ wrote: post #109
synesso wrote: post #77

TallyGo employee here. We have free map impressions for customers of our navigation SDK.

If you're going to promote your product you should probably have a link in your comment. Few things: * Who's your mapping provider? * Why do I need to sign up to even see example code? * Why would I use this over something like MapBox? * What's your accuracy like in Australia?

I'm an employee. It's not my product. I didn't include a link because I thought it would be too spammy. It's tallygo.com.

At this time, we are a mix of mapbox + our own data.

I don't know why you need to sign up to see sample code. I'll give that feedback.

For mapping you'd use it over mapbox because it comes for free with your navigation package. For navigation you'd use it over mapbox because it has better turn-by-turn instructions, routes and traffic estimates.

The map is accurate throughout the world. The navigation product is specific to North America at this time, but it will expand.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#289

Post by dmortin »

joshe wrote: post #62

Apple's web mapping free tier is huge: Apple 250K map views / *day* Mapbox 50K map views / month Google ($200 credit buys you) 28k dynamic map views / month Once it comes out of beta, I'm guessing their pricing will be pretty aggressive too.

Doesn't Apple's map require a developer account which costs money? I haven't used them, but I seem to remember you have to pay to develop using Apple products.

Re: Farewell, Google Maps

#290

Post by dmortin »

xenadu02 wrote: post #51
zylepe wrote: post #22

This mentions Apple mapkit js. This is the first I’ve seen of that. Has anyone used it before? I’m wary of building anything on a proprietary JavaScript api, but if they provide tiles that can be used in leaflet or mapbox gl it might be an attractive option.

MapKit JS allows 250,000 instantiations and 25,000 service calls per day on the free tier. Currently you must have a paid developer account to use MapKit JS. Beyond that use this form to request an increase in your limit: https://developer.apple.com/contact/request/mapkitjs/ As for pricing, nothing has been announced at this time.

How much does the developer account cost?
Post reply on HN