4 ms·

Yes but none of them have as powerful of a navigation system, nor do they usually account for traffic data which can be incredibly handy when deciding which rou

by Fogest 11y ago

Yes but none of them have as powerful of a navigation system, nor do they usually account for traffic data which can be incredibly handy when deciding which route to take to head home from work or school during rush hour.

liotier 11y ago
Mapquest Open lists "Traffic data © 2014 INRIX, Inc" as one of its data sources: http://info.mapquest.com/attributions/ http://info.mapquest.com/attributions/ - and their maps are from Openstreetmap.
- Fogest 11y ago
  Mapquest I find is not very good though compared to Google Maps. Much harder to find a POI.
danieldk 11y ago
Certainly. But OSM allows you (or anyone else) to use their data, make a startup or non-profit to implement such functionality. Google Maps, in contrast is a data silo. Even if you put data in by contributing it, it's Google's data. The possibilities to implement new ideas on top of it is very limited. As others say, the stuff that people do with OSM is terrific. E.g. you have communities of mountainbikers who enter data about small paths, level of difficulty in the uphill/downhill direction, etc. You can extract a MTB-specific map out of it (which is exactly what openmtbmap does), which renders on your GPS such that all relevant information for mountainbiking is there, routing is adjusted such that you mainly use interesting paths, etc. There are a gazillion other interesting applications that are not possible at all with proprietary maps such as Google maps. Also, these days, the point of interest annotations are better than nearly any other map. Heck, in my area in Germany, even picnic tables, etc. are generally in there.
- Fogest 11y ago
  It really depends on how active your area is though. My area is very bare in OSM. While I've added some stuff to it, it is really too much for one person. It has gotten better I'll admit, but is still lacking. I like OpenStreetMaps a lot, I just don't like the options for apps that are out there.
rmc 11y ago
How do you mean powerful? Sure, traffic is hard to do, since you need real data. But if it's worse routing due to missing roads/paths, then you can improve the data.
- Fogest 11y ago
  As I'm driving somewhere Google can suggest me an alternate route if it sees that traffic is slow ahead and there is a faster route that opens up. Google takes into account construction that may be happening on streets and tries to avoid it if will slow my drive down. Googles ETA's are more accurate and reliable. Googles directions seems to be a lot better taking me on more main streets rather than poorly maintained odd side roads.
  - Piskvorrr 11y ago
    I believe the traffic data has improved a lot when Google has acquired Waze - with such data collection network, of course they have great, realtime data (not complaining; just noting that building such thing takes more than just money).
    - Fogest 11y ago
      My area does not have many people who use Waze. Not much of the data in my area would come from Waze. However they do take data from Android phones and apple phones with Google Maps and can use their locations to find roads that have a lot of people on them. This is great for giving everyone live traffic data. This is something that is hard to compete with. See, most of the time when I am driving I know where I am going, but I want to know the fastest way there when it is busy. Sometimes an accident happens, or some event happened and it is just busy a specific way. I want to know that. OSM can't really help me there. Google maps does. I like to Skydive as well; that is an almost 2 hour drive each way through busy Toronto, Ontario. It can get pretty busy around there. Google suggests me the fastest route there and reroutes if a faster route opens. My last drive there I saved 15 minutes just because Google maps directed me around a traffic jam. If I was using an OSM app I would have had to go right through that traffic jam and lost 15 minutes of time, and burned more gas. I love OSM, and gladly contribute edits and gps traces to it, but I still can't use it as a primary navigation app until it can compete which it likely will never be able to.

by Fogest 11y ago

liotier 11y ago

Fogest 11y ago
Mapquest I find is not very good though compared to Google Maps. Much harder to find a POI.

danieldk 11y ago

Certainly. But OSM allows you (or anyone else) to use their data, make a startup or non-profit to implement such functionality. Google Maps, in contrast is a data silo. Even if you put data in by contributing it, it's Google's data. The possibilities to implement new ideas on top of it is very limited. As others say, the stuff that people do with OSM is terrific. E.g. you have communities of mountainbikers who enter data about small paths, level of difficulty in the uphill/downhill direction, etc. You can extract a MTB-specific map out of it (which is exactly what openmtbmap does), which renders on your GPS such that all relevant information for mountainbiking is there, routing is adjusted such that you mainly use interesting paths, etc. There are a gazillion other interesting applications that are not possible at all with proprietary maps such as Google maps. Also, these days, the point of interest annotations are better than nearly any other map. Heck, in my area in Germany, even picnic tables, etc. are generally in there.

Fogest 11y ago
It really depends on how active your area is though. My area is very bare in OSM. While I've added some stuff to it, it is really too much for one person. It has gotten better I'll admit, but is still lacking. I like OpenStreetMaps a lot, I just don't like the options for apps that are out there.

rmc 11y ago

How do you mean powerful? Sure, traffic is hard to do, since you need real data. But if it's worse routing due to missing roads/paths, then you can improve the data.

Fogest 11y ago
As I'm driving somewhere Google can suggest me an alternate route if it sees that traffic is slow ahead and there is a faster route that opens up. Google takes into account construction that may be happening on streets and tries to avoid it if will slow my drive down. Googles ETA's are more accurate and reliable. Googles directions seems to be a lot better taking me on more main streets rather than poorly maintained odd side roads.
- Piskvorrr 11y ago
  I believe the traffic data has improved a lot when Google has acquired Waze - with such data collection network, of course they have great, realtime data (not complaining; just noting that building such thing takes more than just money).
  - Fogest 11y ago
    My area does not have many people who use Waze. Not much of the data in my area would come from Waze. However they do take data from Android phones and apple phones with Google Maps and can use their locations to find roads that have a lot of people on them. This is great for giving everyone live traffic data. This is something that is hard to compete with. See, most of the time when I am driving I know where I am going, but I want to know the fastest way there when it is busy. Sometimes an accident happens, or some event happened and it is just busy a specific way. I want to know that. OSM can't really help me there. Google maps does. I like to Skydive as well; that is an almost 2 hour drive each way through busy Toronto, Ontario. It can get pretty busy around there. Google suggests me the fastest route there and reroutes if a faster route opens. My last drive there I saved 15 minutes just because Google maps directed me around a traffic jam. If I was using an OSM app I would have had to go right through that traffic jam and lost 15 minutes of time, and burned more gas. I love OSM, and gladly contribute edits and gps traces to it, but I still can't use it as a primary navigation app until it can compete which it likely will never be able to.