Intel to Acquire 15 Percent Ownership of Here | Hacker News Reader

Intel to Acquire 15 Percent Ownership of Here

newsroom.intel.com

39 pointsdbosch20 comments

I feel like Nokia sold HERE too early. I know they needed the money to engorge Alcatel-Lucent... And I do think it was a good plan to divest of HERE on top of the self-driving car hype wave.

But I think they executed that a bit ahead of time. Peak hype is still a few years away, and the mapping property is unique in the world (nobody else would sell theirs). Meanwhile Nokia was selling from a position of weakness following their near-death experience in the mobile phone market.

I don't understand the hype with here. Google has the better mapping service by far an every other service are far behind, including here map.

The only contender is Osm with is already better than Google in some country and evolving fast.

Some good example is the maps.me application on Android and iOS which is an open source offline map application with everything needed. And you can even contribute to osm from the app.

So why do they buy something which is worse than a free one?

Maybe I'm just missing something.

HERE is what used to be Navteq. They were in the digital mapping/navigation market for cars long before Google was a PhD thesis.

So? Alta Vista was in the search business long before Google was a PhD thesis.

The whole business may have changed quite much over there years. Back in the days you had your own people driving around, know you can crowd source quite much of the data collection. When you have the location data for millions of people, you can for example figure out where the roads go, make good guesses about speed limits and figure out one way streets. Points of interest can be mined from web. From search logs you can probably see if you are missing some addresses.

HERE is nice because you can download complete countries to work offline. Google Maps only lets you select a rectangular area and limits it size to a much smaller area.

OsmAnd allows you to do the same with the OpenStreetMaps.

Back when I used a Windows Phone (Lumia 920), HERE was amazing. I actually bought the Nokia over the HTC specifically for that feature. I switched to a Nexus 4 later on and Google Maps still couldn't compare.

The best feature of HERE, that Google still doesn't have? Telling you where to turn like a human would. Instead of "turn right at 7 Mile Road" (street signs are often difficult to see, or sometimes non-existent), it would say "turn right at the McDonalds". McDonalds is very easy to see.

And like other have said, back then LTE service wasn't as robust as it is today. Having offline maps wherever I went was important. Bear in mind, I haven't used HERE since the Nexus 4 came out.

> Bear in mind, I haven't used HERE since the Nexus 4 came out.

Why aren't you using it today?

I didn't realize it was available on other platforms.

Most of the time when a company wants to get good at something, there are more factors than just the data/software involved. The developers who created it.

It'll be more difficult to hire and train a completely new team of people, and then hope they're a competent team. It's easier to just get the developers who are already experienced with their tools.

This'll be difference if the skill set was somewhat popular, but it'll be difficult to find people who really are good at OSM and the surrounding software + who are willing to work for Intel.

Here had better local data for some regions (google maps could really suck outside us).

Also their app was far better. But that was two years ago, google maps is better now.

Here is not just about maps, producing them and selling those. They are also specialized into complete solutions for Car manufacturers, car suppliers for integration into HUDs for guidance etc. Inside navigation and map making is a ton of stuff which are all challenges for themself like map matching, dead reckoning, compilation of cards, map rendering etc etc... Their stuff also runs on almost every platform.

Won't self-driving cars require 3d LIDAR maps ? and in the process of getting those, 2D maps come as a side benefit ?

During my thesis, I wrote an algorithm (at a organization very with close ties to Here) that takes OSM and transforms it so a very basic 3D map, using lots of assumptions. That derived, baseline map can then get enhanced by sensory data that is being collected over time.

I hear this a lot including from people I respect. However, I don't need LIDAR maps to drive, so why should a self-driving car need one? I get that having knowledge of the road available to the car could make computation easier, but it can't be relied upon as the environment might have changed between capture and driving.

Aside from the name, I love HERE on iOS. It's easily my favorite navigation/maps app.

The UI is simple, quick, and looks much better than either Google or Apple's offerings.

HERE has some great maps and geo tech. It's sad to see them get passed around between various companies that don't know what to do with them.

Ah here

Where?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com