Maarten Deen wrote: > The problem with OSM is that with Google, Google maps is the go-to > site to get everything: map, routing, information. With OSM it is not. > [...] > It just is less userfriendly than having it all on one site.
And that's a great business opportunity for someone... right? Although: it turns out that not even Google has "everything". I guess that if you're a car driver who searches for addresses a lot, especially in places with big long roads (where house numbers are really important), Google Maps is wonderful. But fortunately I live in a country where we have (a) short roads and (b) bikes, and actually Google's not all that. Their bike cartography? "Cartography" is probably too kind. Their bike routing? Sure, if you like being mowed down on lethal fast roads. Their POI display? I sort of fell out of love with that after spending half-an-hour looking for a non-existent bike shop on the back streets of Great Malvern. So, instead, I use OpenCycleMap, CycleStreets, and a couple of other sites. Maybe one day, someone will build the all-in-one British cycle mapping website to end them all, and I'll use that. And I bet you it will be made with OSM data. If even Google can't manage to be everything, openstreetmap.org certainly can't be. Instead, we're at the heart of an ecosystem that allows people to build their own "everything"s. If the OSM-based "everything" for you doesn't exist yet, go out and build it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Using-OpenStreetMap-on-a-daily-basis-tp5768864p5768930.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
