A community-led fork of Organic Maps

Post by JALTU » Tue, May 13, 2025, 2:22 AM UTC

_fat_santa wrote: post #83

karussell wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OSMAnd and OrganicMaps both have the limitation (and big advantage) of functioning offline by default. The routing will be much more powerful (with alternatives on by default) and faster if you enable an online routing service. For OSMAnd this is possible with e.g. GraphHopper: https://www.graphhopper.com/blog/2024/02/27/osmand-with-grap... The same is true for address search. If you have an online address search lik…

> (and big advantage) of functioning offline by default. I don't know about others but that's the main reason I use it. My day to day mapping app is still Google Maps but I always keep a copy of Organic Maps with downloaded maps of wherever I'm going as a backup. While I do not use it often, it's gotten me out of a couple of sticky situations while camping and roadtripping. Organic Maps (and other offline mapping pro…

Post by illiac786 » Tue, May 13, 2025, 3:37 AM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #118

lolinder wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have agreed with you a year ago, but the WordPress debacle shows that the BDFL concept really hangs on the "benevolent" part of the job description. If your BDFL goes rancid your only option is to fork, and hostile forks are very difficult to pull off because it almost invariably forks the community. The BDFL archetype is basically Plato's philosopher king. It's a nice and appealing idea in theory, and works well…

The philosopher king analogy doesn’t hold water because forking is an option.

Post by kupopuffs » Tue, May 13, 2025, 4:27 AM UTC

saubeidl wrote: post #28

Again? Wasn't the whole thing about Organic Maps to be a community-led fork of maps.me? So now we're at a fork of a fork?

Post by K2h » Tue, May 13, 2025, 5:34 AM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #189

Thrymr wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know why Google does so much worse with trails than OSM, but it really does. I expect that Google never saw a market in trail mapping. I also assume no Google employee took an interest in trails as a 10% project. Google Maps doesn't really do much for topography either. Google Earth can be good for trail mapping, but that has basically atrophied since it was acquired from Keyhole.

Yeah, but the thing is that I don't think any of this data is "self-collected". I suspect that OSM gets most of its US trail data (or at least western state trail data) from the National Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. I also suspect that incorporating such a data source into Google Maps is relatively trivial, but they just seemed to have done so.

Post by andrewshadura » Tue, May 13, 2025, 5:52 AM UTC

soperj wrote: post #105

saubeidl wrote: post #28

Again? Wasn't the whole thing about Organic Maps to be a community-led fork of maps.me? So now we're at a fork of a fork?

Neovim is a fork of VIM which was a fork of Stevie which was a fork of vi which was a fork of ed, and it's the piece of software I use probably more than anything.