Hacker News Reader

Comment by altitudinous | Hacker News Reader

Google know more than the author about how Google Maps is used by end users. The author is grading Google Maps based on the number of cities and roads displayed, not how the users use it.

Google provide an alternative mapping product, Google Earth, for satisfying curiosity about the planet. Google maps is primarily a navigation tool. They have very distinct use cases.

View on HN

I'm sure Google knows more than the author about their own maps, but please give the author his due: he wrote a successful blog called 41Latitude that did a lot of in-depth analysis of Google Maps's display of information, and later led the Apple Maps team. If he has something to say about information density on maps, I'm inclined to listen.

I don't think the fact that the author prefers the map he designed means anything about which one is actually better or more usable, regardless of his credentials.

Don't you think it's possible to benefit from someone's expertise while recognizing and taking into account their inherent bias? It's generally difficult to find the former without some degree of the latter.

That is fair comment. I'm certainly one for respecting someone who has experience.

>and later led the Apple Maps team

I'm not sure that puts him in a position to be trusted to criticize google maps. Apple maps has been considered inferior to google maps since its launch.

Just because he has ideas about how to pack an overwhelming amount of information onto a map doesn't mean it's a good idea for normal users.

Apple Maps was considered inferior at launch, not since its launch. There's a difference. Apple Maps caught up pretty fast. There's obviously areas where Google Maps is still better, but there are areas where Apple Maps is better, and it's simply not true to say that it's an inferior product today.

Apple Maps has actually significantly improved since its launch, and I wish people would give it its due. I, for one, often prefer Apple Maps to Google Maps nowadays.

My main problem with Apple Maps has always been that it just shows too little information on the screen, exactly what the author now criticizes about Google Maps. That doesn't seem to have changes with the current Apple Maps.

Funny enough, this guy is responsible for Apple's map design apparently.

"I designed and led the development of Apple’s cartography, and I founded, recruited, and managed Apple’s multinational Cartography team."

http://www.justinobeirne.com/projects

My main (remaining) issue with Apple Maps today is it does not give lane information for upcoming maneuvers. Google Maps does this and I find it invaluable.

Don't mix up data and map design. Google maps is great because the data is unique, but I personally prefer other designs and think that Google Maps has very bad UX.

Apple Maps today is much better than Google Maps. In the context of the article, for example, Apple shows all the cities/towns that Google Maps did in 2010 but no longer shows in 2016.

Nice use of the asshole passive voice there. "Has been considered."

I think the author's point is that as a navigational tool a more balanced map would be superior. I agree. Even on a mobile device I often find myself frustrated at how far in I have to zoom on a Google map to find details that could be included at higher levels. And as he illustrates, the map could be more balanced without being cluttered.

Google Earth is pretty much abandoned at this point. They now give away the "Pro" version and the software hasn't been updated in about a year.

Google Map's directions doesn't work between postal codes in the UK, unless you specify the space. And it hasn't worked for about a year. I must say, I find Google Maps quite difficult to use.

You could try alternatives like OpenStreetMap. In the Netherlands, Germany, France and nearby countries the map quality is often better (and more up to date) than Google Maps, but I don't know about the UK.

For navigation there are separate websites that use OSM data, like yournavigation.org (not sure that's the best one, I just know of it). They often work a bit differently than Google Maps so there might be a slight learning curve.

There is also Bing Maps which has great areal imagery if you're looking for that, only their map quality isn't as good. Certainly not terrible either, though.

I think it's safe to say that the Google Maps team hasn't cared about end-user convenience and utility for quite some time. The Google Maps of 2016 is utterly terrible compared to the same service ten years ago.

You don't get customer feedback like this (https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/maps/HfC6dYi4...) when you're doing things right.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com