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

Google Decides to Monetize Maps

adage.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 374 posts

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#171

Post by jedberg »

JohnFen wrote: post #155
jedberg wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you tried using gmaps for navigation you’d find it to be a far superior to those devices. Does your TomTom tell you “turn into the driveway after the Vitamin Shop”? Because gmaps does.

Honestly, I don't think I'd call that ability "far superior". If it came without cost, it would have some value, but it's not a game-changer or anything.

It was a game changer for me. I would have completely missed the driveway if not for it telling me to look past the Vitamin Shop. Would have taken me five minutes to circle back around again. That seems like a big deal to me.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#172

Post by BubuIIC »

xemoka wrote: post #131
sabareesh wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what do you use now

Check out maps.me for iOS and Android -> Open source, uses OpenStreetMap data (you can fix it!), offline maps with regular updates.

Ugh. In it's core Maps.me might be a good app. But it's sooo full of tracking stuff [1]. And I'm not even sure exodus catches all of them :-/.

There's a fork on F-Droid just called Maps, which removes all those trackers and works really well. [2] Unfortunately there's currently an issue with downloading the maps data, which makes the app currently unusable without manual workarounds. [3]

The other option would be OSMAnd[4], which is a great app but maybe not quite as user-friendly as maps.me/maps when initally getting started with it.

[1] https://reports.exodus-privacy.eu.org/en/reports/search/com.... [2] https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.axet.maps/ [3] https://gitlab.com/axet/omim/issues/78 [4] https://f-droid.org/en/packages/net.osmand.plus/

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#173

Post by JohnFen »

tssva wrote: post #50
brianpgordon wrote: post #39

> Before the changes, Owczarek’s startup got 750,000 free map views a month and then was charged 50 cents for every 1,000 views on top of that. Then Google started charging after 30,000 views and the cost was $7 per 1,000 views. His costs jumped from nothing to $5,000 a month. Ouch . How could that possibly be worth it? Are they just trying to squeeze money out of businesses that are already locked into the Maps API?…

Although I appreciate the effort that has gone into and continues to go into OpenStreetMap the reality is that their data set is still pretty poor in comparison to Google Maps. I would not want to create a delivery business that depended upon it for success. Just last month I found myself in need of a source of map data for a personal use application and thought of OpenStreetMap which led me to looking up my home add…

> the reality is that their data set is still pretty poor in comparison to Google Maps.

That entirely depends on where you are. In the US, there are lots of places where OSM is fully equal to Google Maps. There are other places where it's just downright bad.

If you're in one of the places where OSM maps are good, then they're the way to go. If you're not, and you're not willing to contribute the data required to improve them, then you probably want a different solution.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#174

Post by pault »

gowld wrote: post #83
cageface wrote: post #17

Google is really leaving the door open here for Apple to step in and offer a services bundle with a monthly fee that doesn’t involve stuffing advertising into every nook and cranny of the user experience. I generally prefer Google’s services to Apple’s but there might be a tipping point soon where I’m willing to sacrifice some features in exchange for a generally less creepy product.

Apple gets the wealthy high margin market, Google gets the mass market. People buy iPhones to keep up with fashion, but most of them won't pay for maps because they can't show that off to their acquaintances.

Is that why? I thought I was buying iphones for the high quality, end-to-end user experience design, ecosystem integration, strict standards for third party apps, long-lasting hardware, and high resale value. Now I feel so silly.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#175

Post by Mediterraneo10 »

Tsubasachan wrote: post #53
Svip wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP is not saying they cannot monetise their product as they see fit (it's their product). No one is saying that. But when you have been offering something for free for years, people get used to that being the way of things, users are not going to respond well to the increase in advertisement. Had Google done this from the beginning, people would have been more accepting of it. Generally speaking, if you change a serv…

There aren't a lot of good alternatives to Maps though. I do find that the service is becoming more and more unusable with all the shitty product placements.

> There aren't a lot of good alternatives to Maps though.

For much of the world, OpenStreetMap data is considerably more complete than Google Maps. It is true that there is no website based on OSM that is as convenient as maps.google.com, but more and more people are using maps on mobile, where they are relying on apps and not a website, and OSM-based solutions like Maps.Me are good substitutes for Google’s ecosystem.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#176

Post by lconstable613 »

dininski wrote: post #4

I can't stress enough how much of a bad idea this is. I was stunned when a few days ago I was looking up something on Google Maps and started seeing advertised locations/suggestions. Even though I love the product and have been a fan of Google products for the longest time, their current strategy of monetizing everything they can is very off putting. The direction Chrome is taking is also concerning. Don't know what…

Do you think they could avoid these concerns by avoiding an ad model? E.g. what if they had a version of EB5 maps for investors (https://eb5affiliatenetwork.com/eb-5-tea-map/) or integrated route planning to optimize ambulance trips (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2982752/)?

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#177

Post by JohnFen »

puzzle wrote: post #27
kgwxd wrote: post #6

A few months ago, I noticed navigaton saying thing like "take the next right, after Key Bank". Clearly an ad, as there is nothing ambiguous about the turn. Haven't seen it mentioned by anyone else, am I the only one?

It's not an ad¹. A lot of humans navigate that way, for many reasons. Google has done research on that through the years. Landmarks might be easier to spot and are an useful confirmation that you got the turn right. Do you never ask yourself if you just made a mistake? Perhaps you got distracted by a passenger, another vehicle or a pedestrian. The street name you are turning onto might be not as visible because the s…

> A lot of humans navigate that way

Sadly, I am not one of those people. Street names,combined with "turn in x feet", works much better for me than using landmarks.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#178

Post by jonknee »

rootusrootus wrote: post #127
nullc wrote: post #29

Maps has been awful and getting worse for a long time. If it's not routing me 25+ miles further to save "1 minute" (really a multi-minute slowdown in the 90th percentile) then its failing to give comprehensible directions in order to interpose business names. Maybe the monetization is finally makes competing with it attractive enough.

What killed GMaps for me was the dogged insistence that the correct route through the city involves making left turns onto busy multilane roads at rush hour from a side street with a stop sign, just to avoid a half-block of stopped traffic waiting for a left turn signal.

On the other hand I was on the interstate the other day and it told me to get off and take a detour, I ended up avoiding a massive backup. I don't always take the advice, but man I like having the opportunity.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#179

Post by JohnFen »

mythz wrote: post #170
JohnFen wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they had no competition when it was released There were multiple competing products when Google Maps was released, so they had competition. Google's product was simply better at than most alternatives at the time.

There was no real-time Consumer Maps App that came close to competing with Google Maps UX. Now there are multiple Consumer Mapping Services that replicate the instant utility of Google Maps, but it was revolutionary with no equal at the time.

I agree (as I said) that Google offered a solution that was superior to the competition. My only point was that there was, in fact, competition.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#180

Post by JohnFen »

jedberg wrote: post #171
JohnFen wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I don't think I'd call that ability "far superior". If it came without cost, it would have some value, but it's not a game-changer or anything.

It was a game changer for me. I would have completely missed the driveway if not for it telling me to look past the Vitamin Shop. Would have taken me five minutes to circle back around again. That seems like a big deal to me.

Fair enough. Different people have different needs.
Post reply on HN