2 ms·
I can see the advantages of both styles. Scale and proximity are very important to people traveling to destinations they don't usually travel to (often tourists
by kmoser 2y ago
I can see the advantages of both styles. Scale and proximity are very important to people traveling to destinations they don't usually travel to (often tourists), but the schematic nature of this new map definitely makes it easier to tell how the system interconnects.
It would be great if, in addition to providing realtime bus and train info, the MTA provided realtime station info so third parties could create maps in any style that were guaranteed to be correct because they would pull from live station data.
- mmooss 2y agoFor purposes of a subway trip in Manhatten, for example, scale isn't that important - a train will quickly take you a long way if you can get on the right one.
- kmoser 2y agoIt's not just about how far the train can take you; it's also about how far you have to walk to your destination once you exit. For example, the squashed height of the new map makes it look like if you exit at Central Park South, you can walk to Central Park North in a relatively short amount of time, when in fact it's about 2.5 miles. Being able to determine relative distances also helps you decide whether it's worth waiting for the next train, or whether to switch from an express to a local or vice-versa.
- tekla 2y agoThe old map makes prospect park look like a jaunt when its quite a hike. It's not useful in the way you claim.
- tekla 2y agoThey do, for as many lines that have the ability to do it. That's what the Google maps data is based on.