Comment by p2t2p | Hacker News Reader

Comment by p2t2p | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Aaaaand none of that matters. Not many people enjoy sitting there, mapping stuff, so openstreetmap is not going to get any better without corporations contributing to it like they do with Linux kernel.

Lawsuits doesn't matter much as well - with Google's power they can either:

- Afford a settlement, bunch of them - Make the litigation to take long-long-long time - Lobby for some law to protect them.

Nobody ain't gonna switch to anymore. Folks that are ok with Apple maps are already using it and besides Apple maps there is no huge competitor. Here we Go maps are good for navigation but they don't know anything about business around you so good luck finding anything that you don't know precise address for.

Even folks on iPhones who use Apple Maps have Google Maps installed. For me it:

- I just drive around to a place I know about: Apple Maps - I need to find a place by name: Google Maps - I go to bush: Here we Go maps a maybe Google Maps because I can download them as well.

People need to realise that Google is unstoppable machine right now with _enormous_ resources and they can do almost whatever.

Recently EU slapped a "huge" fine on Google. So what? What happened? Has anything changed?

The real solution is for corporations who depend on navigation services is to pay people to contribute to openstreetmap like it happens with Linux kernel right now. Freedom for people, tool for business, all win.

OSM has better data in certain aspects. The big problem with OSM is not about the data, but that it isn't designed to be used as a map. When someone visits osm.org, it is very barebones and the search feature doesn't work very well to find places unless you know the syntax. The team working on OSM themselves say that OSM is not a map, but instead a database.

Anyway, Google would never have gotten the data that it has without the contributions of the people. And the dedicated mappers in my city have all turned to OSM now. Hence leading to better mapping in terms of road data, bicycle paths and other features that businesses do not care about mapping.

I agree with the search, but being a map is where OSM shines.

When I visit google maps a see a bunch of colorful boxes and notable locations, I have no idea why it chooses the notable locations it does but it appears to be either paid or some sort of SEO shenanigans, a local curry place is list but one of the biggest train stations in the country isn't (Southern Cross in Melbourne), recently they've also tried to cover the map with the "explore" panel.

When I look at the same area with OSM it shows the train station and shows me the street names with the street names all those colored boxes (buildings) are information, without them they're just noise.

And when you zoom into Google Maps, the colours for "built-up area" and "open space that isn't a park" get more and more similar until they're almost indistinguishable, so from certain point on all you're seeing is a bunch of streets against a featureless grey background, which I find rather irritating.

> dedicated mappers in my city have all turned to OSM now

That's very encouraging to hear! It motivates me to push more for using OSM in client projects, as it's the best alternative to Google Maps, especially if the latter starts showing ads.

"The big problem with OpenStreetMap is... ...that it isn't designed to be used as a map"

I can see given the name that that could be confusing to some people.

But there are very good mobile apps that use OSM data. In my experience, OSM data can be excellent in some areas, and dismal in others. So, literally, YMMV. Fortunately, OSM data is excellent where I live, so I use that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com