Google Maps' Moat • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#601

Post by tbyehl » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 3:44 PM UTC

therobotking wrote: post #423

nicolapede wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, thanks a lot for sharing. It looks wonderful. One thing that I am wondering is: as much reluctant as I am in using Google services, I must admit that Google Map is unbeaten -- in my own experience -- in finding the quickest route in traffic. Is there any alternative service for this purpose?

They now owned by Google but I find Waze to consistently provide better and faster routing (by car) than Google Maps when I use them both on my Android phone.

I find Waze to be absolutely horrific at routing. Just this week, at the start of a route, it sent me into a wreck on a surface street it already knew was causing crawling speeds for over a mile. 13 minutes in traffic it should have avoided.

In the general sense, Wave greatly prefers higher average travel speeds over distance to the point of being comical. Going between my two most frequent destinations can be 34 miles on a bunch of super highways or 21 miles of surface street with a long stretch state highway that is mostly posted 55mph. The calculated ETAs are usually within 3 minutes of each other but Waze almost always wants me to travel the longer distance -- burning a bunch more gas and making the drive more stressful.

Then there's all the screwy stuff it does with side streets. Having to enter busy arterial roads from uncontrolled intersections is probably not saving me time and is certainly not making my travels safer or less stressful. Especially when it wants me to turn left.

Waze is a nice substitute for shuffling my Valentine One between vehicles.

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#602

Post by Stephen304 » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 5:11 PM UTC

ashark wrote: post #544

kbart wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no perfect map (at least for now), I've had the same experience with every map app I tried. You just have to choose which one works best on a given location.

Mapping seems like a great candidate for a nation-state level project. Make the data open and free (or cheap) to download, add an API with a lowish fee. Governments at every level already collect tons of this data—satellite imagery, utility, street openings/closings/maintenance, address mapping, and so on. Unify it, open it, and let businesses compete over who has the best interface and value-add instead of everyone…

I feel like this is already partially the case with OSM. Many cities offer online GIS services where you can download lots of data using a GIS program (MassGIS for example). Openstreetmaps allows anyone to make their own mapping app without worrying about where to source the data.

The main barrier is getting contributors to add data to OSM. Some cities like Boston / Somerville seem to have hired office staff to improve OSM, as I see a lot of edits from usernames relating to the city in those areas. Another barrier is that the GIS system can be hard to work with, a lot of the programs being expensive and comercial. I managed to compile QGIS from the AUR but got confused by the thousands of coordinate systems and the exporting process, so my hometown will have to go without subdivision labels until someone more experienced can add them.

I'm really hoping that more people can make maps apps using OSM data, since OSM is often up to date enough for my needs in the areas I am in, but the best app I've seen so far (Maps.me) has a kinda old interface as well as map rendering that feels too cluttered to me compared to google maps (details shown at various zoom levels).

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#603

Post by jdminhbg » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 6:23 PM UTC

che_shirecat wrote: post #555

jdminhbg wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two reasons: 1. Google’s Material UI is a total dumpster fire and I use it only as a last resort. 2. Apple Maps integrates much better with everything else I’m using, so the experience is smoother (e.g., looking up an address on my laptop and then sending directions to my phone). I keep Google Maps around as a backup, mostly for places of interest way out in the boonies, like hiking trailheads.

Do you have any coherent reasoning behind your characterization of Material as a "total dumpster fire"? Other than "I don't like it and thus it must be bad?"

A large part of it is certainly my personal preferences. And even if Material were itself good, completely disregarding the UI pattern the rest of the phone follows in your apps to implement your own is still going to be jarring.

But I always come back to Material's "Up" button when asked for an example: https://material.io/guidelines/patterns/navigation.html#navi...

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#604

Post by jacksmith21006 » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 6:24 PM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #378

iNerdier wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To go with the comparison mentioned in the article though, Apple maps doesn’t even have an option to cycle at the moment. I never use it in London for just that reason. They’ve decided that it’s more important to add ride sharing as an option before cycling in what I can only assume is a product of their being in suburban America.

Cycling is a relatively new feature even on Google maps. I believe it appeared about three years ago? While Apple is still playing catch-up, it appears to me that cycling, and all other features mentioned in the article, are exceptionally ameliorable to machine learning, and its advances over the last few years. Apple being the only other company in the world with access to the wealth of position data on users' phone…

A lot easier said than done. Plus not even sure if Apple cares to catch up. But Google is also running so fast and now putting SDC on the road collecting more data it is hard to see Apple ever catching up.

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#605

Post by paloaltokid » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 6:54 PM UTC

ucaetano wrote: post #575

paloaltokid wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is 100% just your opinion. :) Same as me.

No, it's economics and game theory. In situations where most of the cost to set up a business is upfront, the marginal cost is very low and you can't "move" the immobilized capital after (like power lines, train lines, water main, fiber optic networks), there is a massive advantage to the first entrant (the "incumbent"). In these cases, there are massive barriers for new entrants: any new entrant would have to make a…

I have a degree in economics and it's definitely just your opinion, man. But it all ends up being very philosophical and "what's the kind of world you want to live in" type stuff. I'm glad to leave it at agree to to disagree.

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#606

Post by jacksmith21006 » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 7:07 PM UTC

My biggest issue with Apple maps is lack of lane to get into when driving you get everywhere with Google maps. I can not live without this feature is not the greatest driver and really need this.

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#607

Post by bigbugbag » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 8:43 PM UTC

Freak_NL wrote: post #327

aluhut wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use it frequently. It's not. Especially regarding updating businesses, small roads (and road quality), paths, opening hours, closed roads&paths/construction sites, bike maps, everything regarding detailed information basically. I have been adding bus stop markers for blind people or types of pedestrian crossings, recycling containers, street light, to OSM with StreetComplete. There is so much more there. Next time,…

Or, if OpenStreetMap is lacking in your local area, help out! OpenStreetMap thrives when local mappers are involved. Compare this section of a Dutch city: Google: https://www.google.nl/maps/@53.1983621,5.767509,16z?hl=nl OpenStreetMap: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.1986/5.7679 Apple: (I guess Apple maps can't be linked to on the web?) It also helps a lot if your government can be persuaded to open up their…

The map used in the posted article has been since filled buildings on OSM: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/126762#map=17/41.33998...

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#608

Post by bigbugbag » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 8:50 PM UTC

I was surprised that there was no building in OpenStreetMap as I'm used to OSM having detailed buildings everywhere (in my part of Europe they added cadaster maps).

So I tried to locate the place shown in the article on OpenStreetMap and sure enough, if the buildings were missing when the article was writtent, they're not anymore.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/126762#map=17/41.33998... https://framapic.org/04W5qV0AS3t1/8j6obUnCNf1H.png

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#609

Post by pas » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 9:23 PM UTC

ncdev wrote: post #78

Google also uses (used?) a great deal of human judgment in Maps (note: these sources are a few years old now) [1, 2]. [1] https://www.wired.com/2014/12/google-maps-ground-truth/ [2] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-g...

I was surprised how the post yammered on about extracting data from street view .. when a lot of data is added by humans (Local Guides) and by business owners themselves.

Re: Google Maps' Moat

#610

Post by rurban » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

aluhut wrote: post #292

sytelus wrote: post #142

Many people don't realize why Google maps are so much better than anything out there. I would actually give lot of credit to Marissa Mayer who suddenly became in charge of maps from otherwise more higher position. Thanks to her influence in Google SLT and ability to make impressive arguments, she was able to make a case for maps as core pillar in Google's offering and consequently obtain huge investment and large tal…

No love for OpenStreetMaps here? In Germany it is often superior to everything out there. Especially due to the mappers/updaters motivation and nice gamification tools like StreetComplete or more professional tools like Vespucci. https://github.com/westnordost/StreetComplete http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vespucci

You are right. In Germany and Austria OpenStreetMaps and Microsoft Maps are superior over Google Maps. But this has entirely political reasons.

Back in the 80ies when we started working on these kind of mapping techniques Microsoft was the first to work on it (i.e. buy those companies, partner with institutes), and was the first to get the local government contracts for the flyover photos.

Google had only access to the US satellite data, with a much lower resolution, Microsoft had access to the yearly 2D government overflights and even to the local stereo camera 3d images. 4x a year on 1000m. Very good data. Paired with streetview-like cars photographing the facades this was the future. Google didn't invent this, Microsoft partners (also working for NASA) did this.

Some cities still only work together with Microsoft, they do have long contracts. So streetview is not public, 3d images are government only and 2d maps are behind.

OpenStreetMaps solved this problem with crowdsourcing. More accurate, but not scalable. Google solved it technically, Microsoft politically.

When I worked in city planning, I used to write such a 3d image software, which detects roofs, trees, cars, streets, and build an automatic 3d model out of it. These models were used to detect illegal buildings or enhancements, which brings in more taxes. They had no interest in making these maps public, only for certain architectural or city-planning contests.