3 ms·

> Less is more. You don't want to show as much information as you can... 100% agree, but I don't think it's saying more is better. Rather that because maps no

> Less is more. You don't want to show as much information as you can... 100% agree, but I don't think it's saying more is better. Rather that because maps now have dozens of zoom-levels (as opposed to just 1 with paper maps), they can show all sorts of things that wouldn't have been included before. Things like houses, small businesses, etc. Things that would've never been on a paper map. This makes the POI dead because now anything can be included, anything can be on the map (regardless of its importance). (Example from my own experience: Google maps has an outline of my house on it and even my backyard tool shed. But I've never seen a paper map that also had this.) Also 100% agree with you that personalization is awesome, but it seems like the whole point was specifically to examine the defaults. To see what decisions were made for the defaults and how it made the two different.

Fnoord 10y ago
> Rather that because maps now have dozens of zoom-levels (as opposed to just 1 with paper maps), they can show all sorts of things that wouldn't have been included before. Things like houses, small businesses, etc. Things that would've never been on a paper map. Yes, I got that point, but I think my counterpoint was stronger. Perhaps I'm odd, but a POI which doesn't have my interest is not a POI. If I'm in Paris, and I have no interest in seeing the Eiffel Tower, then the Eiffel Tower is not a POI for me. It may very well be one for other people, and I respect that, but I've seen the damn thing on multiple pictures already (I've seen it IRL as well). So from a technical PoV the POI is dead because everything can be a POI? This suggests the developer believes more is better. Whereas when I looked at Google Maps reducing the amount of information I get the impression they realise less is more. The default should not matter. Do the default search results on Google Search matter? Given the rise of the bubble, less and less. I hope the same can be true for Google Maps and Apple Maps. At the same time, we must be careful to regularly think outside of our bubbles, or look into the bubbles of others (e.g. your wife's, son's, aunt's, etc).
- xander23 10y ago
  > I think my counterpoint was stronger. No, what I was saying was that your counterpoint isn't a counterpoint. A counterpoint would be: Google shouldn't show new kinds of things on the map (such as houses, small businesses, etc.). The OP is talking about new kinds of things, while you're talking about the density of things. And the OP actually makes the same argument you're making a few paragraphs later: > we’re also seeing the argument for map personalization: Not everyone uses transit, so there might be places—such as landmarks—that are more important to some people. And when it’s life-and-death, hospitals are the most important places in the world. But how often does the average person visit a hospital? Personalized maps are better at surfacing the most appropriate places for each person; but for the default map, something still has to be chosen… and that’s what we saw above. Personalization is great, but something still has to be chosen for the default. That's why the default matters.

Fnoord 10y ago

> Rather that because maps now have dozens of zoom-levels (as opposed to just 1 with paper maps), they can show all sorts of things that wouldn't have been included before. Things like houses, small businesses, etc. Things that would've never been on a paper map. Yes, I got that point, but I think my counterpoint was stronger. Perhaps I'm odd, but a POI which doesn't have my interest is not a POI. If I'm in Paris, and I have no interest in seeing the Eiffel Tower, then the Eiffel Tower is not a POI for me. It may very well be one for other people, and I respect that, but I've seen the damn thing on multiple pictures already (I've seen it IRL as well). So from a technical PoV the POI is dead because everything can be a POI? This suggests the developer believes more is better. Whereas when I looked at Google Maps reducing the amount of information I get the impression they realise less is more. The default should not matter. Do the default search results on Google Search matter? Given the rise of the bubble, less and less. I hope the same can be true for Google Maps and Apple Maps. At the same time, we must be careful to regularly think outside of our bubbles, or look into the bubbles of others (e.g. your wife's, son's, aunt's, etc).

xander23 10y ago
> I think my counterpoint was stronger. No, what I was saying was that your counterpoint isn't a counterpoint. A counterpoint would be: Google shouldn't show new kinds of things on the map (such as houses, small businesses, etc.). The OP is talking about new kinds of things, while you're talking about the density of things. And the OP actually makes the same argument you're making a few paragraphs later: > we’re also seeing the argument for map personalization: Not everyone uses transit, so there might be places—such as landmarks—that are more important to some people. And when it’s life-and-death, hospitals are the most important places in the world. But how often does the average person visit a hospital? Personalized maps are better at surfacing the most appropriate places for each person; but for the default map, something still has to be chosen… and that’s what we saw above. Personalization is great, but something still has to be chosen for the default. That's why the default matters.