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

331–340 of 374 posts

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#331

Post by Aeolun »

orf wrote: post #277
mailslot wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open Streetmap doesn’t build laser scanning drones, or fleets of connected 360 camera vehicles, or the tech and infrastructure to do the mapping. SOMEONE has to build all of that. It can’t be free. If it’s govt funded, then there WILL be corruption, scams, and it’ll be run as well as the DMV.

Because the private sector is free of corruption and scams? The UK ordnance survey[1] is government run and is generally fantastic. They cover every inch of the UK in excruciating detail, provide centimeter precise GPS coordinates for everything and publish invaluable, cheap maps of it all. Why do you assume that the seemingly inept and corrupt US standard is the baseline that everything else will be? 1. https://en.m…

UK agencies are recently doing pretty good. UK government however...

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#332

Post by lucb1e »

bgilly wrote: post #322
PerfectElement wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using their search with autocomplete as a convenience feature in our app. My bill will go from $0 to $3,000 per month. I'd be happy to pay them a reasonable price, but this costs more than our whole infrastructure, so we are moving to a vendor who offers a more realistic pricing for us.

Same thing here - have been using Google's autocomplete for 5 years and now it has become our biggest monthly expense for a niche consumer app. It cut our net profits in half. Trouble is that there is no other service available with as comprehensive of coverage across the globe and so many languages as Google's, so we're just dealing with the hit.

Why do we need this though? I'm perfectly capable of typing my address, have been doing it for years. Every time I start typing where I live and some box pops up with a Google logo in it, I feel kind of violated.

Meanwhile in Google HQ, someone wins a bet over in which house this cookie deleting nerd using Linux on turns out to live in.

If we can please stop it, or at least opt out ("click here not to share your address details with Google") and turn the input box into a dumb textarea, that'd be great. Should save you money, too.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#333

Post by lucb1e »

philips wrote: post #230
pojntfx wrote: post #3

May OpenStreetMap prevail!

How can I replicate the common UX of trip planning on my laptop and then send to phone with the directions with OSM? Ideally with offline maps. I really want to love OpenStreetMap but the usability gap is huge. I am happy to pay for something too.

OsmAnd. Not sure you need to use a laptop at all with that, but you can also route over any gpx track so you can generate that on your laptop. The ux is of course not as good, but my girlfriend and I got used to it pretty quickly and use it for all our routing.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#334

Post by jdreyfuss »

hedora wrote: post #101
johnchristopher wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not free and installed by default on every android devices ? You mean, I can buy a subscription and not rent the service with my search history ? Where's the sign-up button ?

There are tons of viable competitors to google maps, even on Android, last time I checked. They all have different monetization strategies, and all provide good enough turn by turn directions. I regularly use Here WeGo for its offline support. Sygic is probably still fine. I think Sygic moved to a freemium model, and I get the impression Here is subsidized by luxury car manufacturers. Yelp crushes google maps on sear…

I think when a lot of people made their "maps provider" decision, there weren't a lot of these other options available. Many people use Google Maps because it was the best maps option at the time they were first figuring out their early smartphone apps.

And for newer people, bundling is hugely impactful. Doing nothing is almost always the most popular choice

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#335

Post by objectivetruth »

ebg13 wrote: post #306
mrep wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you rather have every website prompt you with a paywall instead because that is the only other profitable solution I can think of.

You are either ignoring the context of this subthread or agreeing with it. I'll remind you: ashishmalik says "Everything is ok because money!"

You are seemingly ignoring parent's point that the adtech model funding our free web services is one of only two seemingly-possible models, and they both involve money. I guess a utopian 100% decentralized mesh network with easy-to-home-build commodity OTS hardware and 100% open well-defined protocols is theoretically possible but that's not how the cards played out.

Nothing is black and white, most people recognize nuance, and for most people the net balance of the trade-offs in the current 'free online services subsidized by adtech' model is good enough.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#336

Post by objectivetruth »

ebg13 wrote: post #158
jfoster wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You dodged my question, but I'm happy to answer yours. I do think that advertising has made the world better. A majority of the content on the internet is viable because of it.

> I do think that advertising has made the world better. A majority of the content on the internet is viable because of it. AKA the "harmful behavior is ok when it's profitable" theory. I don't agree.

Every activity or decision has the potential for good and bad nuances. Bacon is terrible for the pig, the pig farm's neighbors, and my cholesterol level... but on occasion I make the decision that the taste experience outweighs those negatives.

Most people (or "the market") have decided that the cons of adtech are outweighed by the pros of generally free web services.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#337

Post by 43920 »

blantonl wrote: post #236
blueski wrote: post #222

Our Google Maps bill went from ~$100k per year to $380k per year as a result of these changes. Needless to say, we're moving over to Mapbox. What Google seems to miss is how this will affect customers' receptiveness to other Google products in the long-term. Having pulled the rug from under us once, there's no way we could consider e.g. a migration to Cloud in case the same happened again (where moving to a different…

I agree. I get that when you build your business around someone else's API that you are responsible for any changes and you should be prepared when business models change, but this would be analogous to milk prices going from $1/pint to $3.80/pint. A 280% increase in pricing after you've gained dominance in market share is a tough pill to swallow and left a really bad taste in developer's mouths. I too have moved on…

Mapbox actually fired the majority of the people they were paying to work on OSM a few months ago [1]. I don't really know why, and it seems like a really odd decision (unless maybe they're developing their own non OSM-based map), but if anyone knows why I'd love to find out.

[1] Compare https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mapbox&diff... to the current list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapbox#Mapbox_Data_Team

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#338

Post by londons_explore »

CharlesColeman wrote: post #195
alasdair_ wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d strongly recommended putting future efforts into Open Streetmap instead - they have a fantastic set of data and tools and are usually (in my experience) more accurate and updated more quickly than Google.

I wish more people would do this, but sometimes it's a tough sell. I once tried to encourage a bunch of people who were banging their heads bloody trying to contribute to Facebook's places database to switch to editing OpenStreetMap instead. Most didn't want to switch -- they were convinced that their miserable experience improving Facebook was more impactful because it was a more popular product that they knew they…

OSM is used underlying a lot of commercial apps and services.

Most people don't realise that though, so they think their edits correcting roads will only get seen by a handful of open source geeks.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#339

Post by londons_explore »

orf wrote: post #277
mailslot wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open Streetmap doesn’t build laser scanning drones, or fleets of connected 360 camera vehicles, or the tech and infrastructure to do the mapping. SOMEONE has to build all of that. It can’t be free. If it’s govt funded, then there WILL be corruption, scams, and it’ll be run as well as the DMV.

Because the private sector is free of corruption and scams? The UK ordnance survey[1] is government run and is generally fantastic. They cover every inch of the UK in excruciating detail, provide centimeter precise GPS coordinates for everything and publish invaluable, cheap maps of it all. Why do you assume that the seemingly inept and corrupt US standard is the baseline that everything else will be? 1. https://en.m…

Their maps were probably world-leading in the 90's.

Now though, I feel like the tech giants have overtaken them.

Where is the street view or 3d models? Where are the opening times of every shop? Where is the traffic congestion info? Where is the ability to look up a house number and find where on the street it is?

These are all things I regularly want to know and are location based, so really ought to be part of a mapping service.

Re: Google Decides to Monetize Maps

#340

Post by londons_explore »

tokyodude wrote: post #151
twothamendment wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct. The reverse is true too, why should contribute data to their maps service for free? I've done lot of work to add and correct roads, update business info and addresses in my area. If they want to fill the map with ads they have that right - but when they drive me (and people like me) away, their product will suffer.

I get the use of an amazing map service for which I pay them with my data. I even contribute fixes, reviews, and photos. I'm pretty happy with that price. I don't give them anything for free. They pay me in service. I actually want the ads too although I want them 100x better than they are and I'm sure Google like Amazon will fail for a while at curating the fake stuff. In an ideal world they'd have inventory and men…

>. "pizza with avocados open now" or "1/4inch wrench" and it could tell me exactly where I can get them right now.

Answering queries like that has so much revenue potential. Possibly even more than the rest of Google put together. You bet they're trying to get there and have been for years. The reality is it's super hard to collect that data.

They've tried getting shops to upload info about what they sell (the Google Shopping manifest files). They've tried putting Bluetooth trackers in every store (they mailed them out to all big businesses in 2014 and said 'stick one of these in every department of your shop') to track who goes there to know what store might have what products. They've tried putting their own staff in the stores (Google Shopping Express, and the Chromebox staff in electronics stores).

None of it has worked, but they'll keep trying.

Post reply on HN