Anecdotally I’m way more likely to care about a grocery than any of the locations you’ve mentioned.
The goal isn’t creating a historical representation of where things were.
It’s supposed to be functional.
The goal isn’t creating a historical representation of where things were.
It’s supposed to be functional.
For whom? Aldi who is highlighted? Google who is paid? Or the poor suckers trying to find something?
A subtle dark pattern that Google uses is that they have roughly one size of POI, so there isn't enough space to show everything, or most things, it has to pick and choose. That artificial scarcity is tied to the profit motive (pay for prominence) and is user hostile.
Sure, grocery stores are most common, but often you're looking for something else. Using small icons, smaller text, or some other UI affordance to facilitate finding what you need nearby, quickly and without text searching, would be great, but isn't in Google's interest.
How many useful sizes could they have on a phone?
> the profit motive (pay for prominence)
Can you pay for this?
Yes - https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/9934637?hl=en
Point being - Aldi is paying for this service. The map is skewering reality.
It’s not about historical representation, it’s about the fact that map-making has been around for awhile, and there are some great existing techniques for presenting that information that could be drawn on. But no, let’s melt colors together and highlight corporate chain stores with pins.
But it's 100% fine that Google Maps isn't the all-singing all-dancing maps app for everyone. Other maps are available. Plurality is good.