I'd be fine with that, too, as long as Google Maps started to get the routing tools which Waze has.
Basically, I want a mapping app which looks at a long trip and suggests alternate routes based on traffic, accident reports, etc. and is smart enough to weight routes based on historical trends. Waze has much of that but could use the kind of tuning which Google should be really good at and the much larger dataset it'd get if e.g. all Google Maps users were contributing data points.
The only other complaint I have with Waze is the clumsy UI for searching & adding stops (not to mention the 1 waypoint limit), the former being an area where Google should be able to deliver huge quality improvements almost effortlessly.
That's how it seems to me as well. Maps had a smoother, more responsive UI and more developed map/routing data, but Waze had crowdsourced updates for more accurate reporting of accidents and delays.
As a user of both (and investor in neither) it always seemed to me that Waze did the crowdsourcing thing pretty well but their map editing tools were really clunky, UI was much less responsive, and they just didn't have any good way to fund the service (as indicated by the fact that all I ever saw in terms of advertising were little Taco Bell icons any time I was near a Taco Bell).
Google has the backend, the framework for making money from the service, and established routing and mapping systems whereas Waze's more granular and up-to-date info on traffic conditions offered something Maps didn't have.
Basically, the reasons people used Waze over Maps also made good additions to Maps. Would've been fine the other way around too but the reality was that Google was the larger, more established company so in typical fashion, they bought the smaller one to gain their features.
I'm with this guy, it alternate-routed me around traffic in Seattle a few weeks ago. Without a question saved me lots of time, and I wasn't the only one snaking down that same exact route.
(There was an accident on interstate 5 south, the backup was obviously affecting traffic on the highway but also the surface streets leading up to the onramp. GMaps had the most direct route, of following the traffic to the nearest ramp as the alternate route, with the default route being a snaking journey down some streets to the next ramp that was beyond the traffic.)
Comments
I'd be fine with that, too, as long as Google Maps started to get the routing tools which Waze has.
Basically, I want a mapping app which looks at a long trip and suggests alternate routes based on traffic, accident reports, etc. and is smart enough to weight routes based on historical trends. Waze has much of that but could use the kind of tuning which Google should be really good at and the much larger dataset it'd get if e.g. all Google Maps users were contributing data points.
The only other complaint I have with Waze is the clumsy UI for searching & adding stops (not to mention the 1 waypoint limit), the former being an area where Google should be able to deliver huge quality improvements almost effortlessly.
You described the functionality of Google Maps on my phone. I believe Waze has already been integrated to a large extent.
That's how it seems to me as well. Maps had a smoother, more responsive UI and more developed map/routing data, but Waze had crowdsourced updates for more accurate reporting of accidents and delays.
As a user of both (and investor in neither) it always seemed to me that Waze did the crowdsourcing thing pretty well but their map editing tools were really clunky, UI was much less responsive, and they just didn't have any good way to fund the service (as indicated by the fact that all I ever saw in terms of advertising were little Taco Bell icons any time I was near a Taco Bell).
Google has the backend, the framework for making money from the service, and established routing and mapping systems whereas Waze's more granular and up-to-date info on traffic conditions offered something Maps didn't have.
Basically, the reasons people used Waze over Maps also made good additions to Maps. Would've been fine the other way around too but the reality was that Google was the larger, more established company so in typical fashion, they bought the smaller one to gain their features.
I'm with this guy, it alternate-routed me around traffic in Seattle a few weeks ago. Without a question saved me lots of time, and I wasn't the only one snaking down that same exact route.
(There was an accident on interstate 5 south, the backup was obviously affecting traffic on the highway but also the surface streets leading up to the onramp. GMaps had the most direct route, of following the traffic to the nearest ramp as the alternate route, with the default route being a snaking journey down some streets to the next ramp that was beyond the traffic.)
Are you using Android? The iOS version has never done that for me but it'd be really nice to know it's likely to show up soon.