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

Google Maps Hacks

simonweckert.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 397 posts

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#111

Post by plorkyeran »

capableweb wrote: post #107
ryanianian wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my common complaint with Waze and most driving apps - they optimize for "least time," not "least anguish". I would almost always prefer to spend an extra 5 minutes on my "normal" route (that I have on auto-pilot) instead of saving that 5 minutes by taking confusingly-named side-streets with lots of left turns onto other busy side-streets. I don't know if Apple Maps really gets this any better to be honest.

Sorry for the minor comment but I noticed this part: "side-streets with lots of left turns onto other busy side-streets" Now I live in Europe, presumably you live in the US (sorry if that's wrong). Is there any particular difficulties with doing left turns compared to right turns where you live?

Left turns cross all four lanes of traffic involved in an intersection while right turns involve two, so if either street is busy you have to wait longer for a gap.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#112

Post by matmo »

matz1 wrote: post #42
ody4242 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess an important piece (conveniently left out of this story) is that it does not work if there are other cars on the road, as these cars quickly invalidate the data coming from the slow cart.

But wouldn't that other car be classified as error?

I don't know what the tipping point is, but it'd probably take more than one. I've commuted through backed up/stopped/solid red sections on a motorcycle where I just get to lane-split and cruise through, and it'd still stay red.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#113

Post by wutbrodo »

ryanianian wrote: post #69
Spooky23 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens on NY 73, which is a road in the Adirondack High Peaks region between the highway and Lake Placid. It’s legit — even though cars are parked, you still need to slow down! I usually avoid Google maps for traveling in areas that I don’t know. It takes you off on stupid routes that save marginal time (if any) too much. Waze is good for interstate travel, but IMO Apple is better for giving you the “right”, lo…

This is my common complaint with Waze and most driving apps - they optimize for "least time," not "least anguish". I would almost always prefer to spend an extra 5 minutes on my "normal" route (that I have on auto-pilot) instead of saving that 5 minutes by taking confusingly-named side-streets with lots of left turns onto other busy side-streets. I don't know if Apple Maps really gets this any better to be honest.

> with Waze and most driving apps - they optimize for "least time," not "least anguish"

It's my impression that Google Maps does the latter; Waze is known for taking wild routes that are nominally faster. I'm not sure that I see a basis for complaint, as they're just offering a choice of different route objectives to optimize for (I know people who explicitly use Waze because they prefer its aggressive optimization to Maps). I suppose a toggle would be nice though.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#114

Post by TooSmugToFail »

Spooky23 wrote: post #60
netsharc wrote: post #23

An interesting "red but no traffic" phenomenon is in Iceland, with roads which are next to scenery viewing points. The roads are mostly empty in this country, but everyone must've slowed down when they saw the breathtaking scenery, and would pull into the viewing point's parking spot to stop and take pictures. On Google Maps these areas were marked red. On another navigation related topic; I was using Waze in a high-…

This happens on NY 73, which is a road in the Adirondack High Peaks region between the highway and Lake Placid. It’s legit — even though cars are parked, you still need to slow down! I usually avoid Google maps for traveling in areas that I don’t know. It takes you off on stupid routes that save marginal time (if any) too much. Waze is good for interstate travel, but IMO Apple is better for giving you the “right”, lo…

>I usually avoid Google maps for traveling in areas that I don’t know. It takes you off on stupid routes that save marginal time (if any) too much.

We relied on GMaps on a recent (my first ever) visit to Malta, and it took us through some pretty dodgy, steep and narrow, local roads on our way in.

We didn't know of this GMaps' preference of, erm, interesting routes, so we figured that's just how Malta is. A few days later and, of course, we learn there's a perfectly normal, pleasant route that took us there in as little time as the dodgy one...

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#115

Post by AlexandrB »

Navigation apps have mostly settled into a comfortable state of "good enough" mediocrity. In addition to the "red but no traffic" problems highlighted by others I find turn by turn directions are incredibly annoying while driving in areas I'm intimately familiar with and there's no way to say "I know what I'm doing when I'm in this area" or "pause giving me voice directions for 10 minutes". Additionally:

* I can't compare multiple modes of transportation on the same map. E.g. driving vs. walking vs. transit.

* There's no way to optimize for minimizing left turns, especially onto busy streets.

* Multi-destination route optimization is not available. E.g. I need to go to the mall, the grocery store, and the bank, what's the sequence of destinations and route that minimizes travel time.[1]

Edit: [1] I realize this is describing the travelling salesman problem, but for small (n it should not be too difficult while still being useful in practice.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#116

Post by andrepd »

viburnum wrote: post #97
8ytecoder wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an understated problem. Google used to regularly take me through a route that involves a left turn in a major road and multiple crossings where cross traffic won’t stop. Literally two blocks from the suggested left turn is a left turn arrow signal which also avoids the dangerous crossings. It’s both dangerous and anxiety inducing and doesn’t save time either.

I wish it had a “no left turns” feature like they have for avoiding tolls.

I wish cities had roundabouts instead of intersections, so that would not be a problem :)

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#117

Post by dangerlibrary »

AlexandrB wrote: post #115

Navigation apps have mostly settled into a comfortable state of "good enough" mediocrity. In addition to the "red but no traffic" problems highlighted by others I find turn by turn directions are incredibly annoying while driving in areas I'm intimately familiar with and there's no way to say "I know what I'm doing when I'm in this area" or "pause giving me voice directions for 10 minutes". Additionally: * I can't co…

My wife and I regularly talk about how "Thanks Google, I'll take it from here" is the best Maps features that doesn't exist.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#118

Post by gregmac »

ryanianian wrote: post #69
Spooky23 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens on NY 73, which is a road in the Adirondack High Peaks region between the highway and Lake Placid. It’s legit — even though cars are parked, you still need to slow down! I usually avoid Google maps for traveling in areas that I don’t know. It takes you off on stupid routes that save marginal time (if any) too much. Waze is good for interstate travel, but IMO Apple is better for giving you the “right”, lo…

This is my common complaint with Waze and most driving apps - they optimize for "least time," not "least anguish". I would almost always prefer to spend an extra 5 minutes on my "normal" route (that I have on auto-pilot) instead of saving that 5 minutes by taking confusingly-named side-streets with lots of left turns onto other busy side-streets. I don't know if Apple Maps really gets this any better to be honest.

I had a dedicated GPS a decade ago (I don't remember what brand) that had route options for Fastest, Shortest or Simplest that were easy to pick when you were first putting in the address. With few exceptions, simplest was usually the best option, especially if driving in an unfamiliar area. I think it basically tried to minimize turns or number of different roads. That would be a nice thing to see on Google Maps.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#119

Post by ryanmcdonough »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #117
AlexandrB wrote: post #115

Navigation apps have mostly settled into a comfortable state of "good enough" mediocrity. In addition to the "red but no traffic" problems highlighted by others I find turn by turn directions are incredibly annoying while driving in areas I'm intimately familiar with and there's no way to say "I know what I'm doing when I'm in this area" or "pause giving me voice directions for 10 minutes". Additionally: * I can't co…

My wife and I regularly talk about how "Thanks Google, I'll take it from here" is the best Maps features that doesn't exist.

You mean pressing “end route” ?

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#120

Post by beefield »

copperx wrote: post #98
beefield wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you do not need a data plan. Or even phones. Just spin up n android emulators and spoof them with the gps data you want? (Disclaimer: I fully expect that to break multiple TOS clauses so I take no responsibility whatsoever if anyone tries this one.)

It's a bit naive to think that Google doesn't have a filtering rule that says "only consider real phones with a true GPS signal".

This may be a bit naive question, but how does Google know that the virtual phone is not a real phone and the signal is not true? In a way that is not spoofable?
Post reply on HN