Apple delivers a new redesigned Maps for users in the United States

Post by codyb » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:47 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #324

K0SM0S wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd probably end with significantly different results based on country. Somehow the underlying logic of mapping AI seems to be more-or-less of a fit for national road systems — for instance in Europe, with lots of discrepancies between borders, it's really hit or miss: in France and Germany I end up on stupid country roads to save 2 minutes on a 2h drive, but that seldom happens in the Netherlands (granted they hav…

I remember using some car’s built-in GPS once and it wanted me to take every freeway exit and get right back on after. Because it decided that saves time/distance. Maps really need a “not worth it” features for tiny optimizations. I’d often prefer a slightly slower route that’s less work to drive.

Post by tinus_hn » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:59 PM UTC

oflannabhra wrote: post #205

pauljonas wrote: post #196

I'd been using Waze for a couple of years, and initially it was far superior to Apple Maps. But a few months back, I got really frustrated with it because it led me down some closed roads & ended up doubling my commute time home from work that day. I'd also been noting how off it was on its estimates on when I'd get to my destination. And I was also perturbed by it not knowing the back street entrance to my work site…

I seem to remember someone posting their results of testing Google Maps, Apple Maps, and Waze for ETA accuracy, and what you describe was also what they found: Apple Maps was the most accurate, Google Maps was optimistic, but accurate, Waze basically reported the best case scenario. Edit: found the original [0] I've long thought that Waze creates the illusion of saving massive amounts of time, when its benefits are m…

Post by tinus_hn » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 12:05 AM UTC

selectodude wrote: post #230

krrrh wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's worse for consumers in the end though? One profession missing in the parent comment are the researchers innovating on differential privacy. Apple has taken great pains to figure out ways to improve their maps without storing massive amounts of private user data, to the extent that they split routes in half, fuzz addresses, and analyze the start and end of trips independently. There's an argument that Google ha…

Google didn’t try and raise the price, they demanded user data in exchange for access.

Post by AWildC182 » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 12:07 AM UTC

georgebarnett wrote: post #341

AWildC182 wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Database_License Because they would be legally obligated to when using OSM as a base for anything. Also, because it would benefit society.

If Apple was legally obligated to contribute back, they would do so. They have a good history of community contribution (eg. Darwin, WebKit) so I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, instead of some random anonymous internet commenter angst.

Post by madcaptenor » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 12:08 AM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #350

acdha wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s horrible even in the U.S.: the model seems to assume left turns are cheap so I always get these routes which involve 15 minutes sitting at an unprotected turn across heavy traffic. I, and apparently a number of other people I‘ve heard mention it, have largely stopped using it because the times are wildly off - and that’s along the East coast in some very popular areas, not exactly an obscure edge case.

It's just incredible that major map providers don't understand how problematic left turns are. There's a reason you seldom see UPS and FedEx trucks trying to turn left in crowded urban settings. It's because they cost time and money. Why don't Google and Apple understand that, and give us an option to avoid or discourage left turns?