5 ms·

I'll think of Rob rolling out his paper map I was just down in southern Oregon, and between the frequent "No Service" and the shitty Google and Apple maps, I w

I'll think of Rob rolling out his paper map I was just down in southern Oregon, and between the frequent "No Service" and the shitty Google and Apple maps, I would have killed for a decent paper map. It's a good thing I had my Garmin app on my phone; it's not reliant on cell service. My parents and I traveled 9000+ miles around the country in 1974, using a Rand McNally atlas to guide us. The experience was far more pleasant than the maps Google offered up just a few days ago. "Offline" wouldn't have helped, the map quality is abysmal. Locations pop in and out of existence as you zoom in. Many features are totally unlabelled (e.g. rivers). The UI sucks as well.

solipsism 10y ago
I agree that we have a long way to go before offline mapping (and online mapping in many contexts) is high quality. That's beside the point though. In the ideal world those things would work perfectly offline on the device I carry around. Paper maps aren't categorically better.
thisrod 10y ago
I think there is a middle ground. Paper and contact does have a categorical advantage for field use: at least, anything with batteries has a categorical disadvantage. On the other hand, it's nice that you can print 1 map of your own to cover terrain that used to be split over the corners of 4 published maps. And it's a pretty cool feeling when you click on contours that the surveyors got wrong and drag them into the right place. There is a place for automation, but that place isn't everywhere.
dozzie 10y ago
You do realize that there is other software out there for displaying maps? Including Google Maps? And some of that software can store maps off-line, if you only care enough to pre-fetch the area you're going to (similar action to buying a paper map in advance)? That being said, I prefer paper maps. Because batteries, because view size, because I personally like paper more than electronics.

solipsism 10y ago

I agree that we have a long way to go before offline mapping (and online mapping in many contexts) is high quality. That's beside the point though. In the ideal world those things would work perfectly offline on the device I carry around. Paper maps aren't categorically better.

thisrod 10y ago

I think there is a middle ground. Paper and contact does have a categorical advantage for field use: at least, anything with batteries has a categorical disadvantage. On the other hand, it's nice that you can print 1 map of your own to cover terrain that used to be split over the corners of 4 published maps. And it's a pretty cool feeling when you click on contours that the surveyors got wrong and drag them into the right place. There is a place for automation, but that place isn't everywhere.

dozzie 10y ago

You do realize that there is other software out there for displaying maps? Including Google Maps? And some of that software can store maps off-line, if you only care enough to pre-fetch the area you're going to (similar action to buying a paper map in advance)? That being said, I prefer paper maps. Because batteries, because view size, because I personally like paper more than electronics.