New Article - Giving Up Google Maps

[thejenn]

Authored by: Jennifer Laycock

Full Text: http://www.searchengineguide.com/laycock/006749.html

A Snippet:

I never thought it would come to this. As fascinated as I've been with Google Maps and their fantastic satellite views, I've found a new love. Windows Live Local, the beta version of Microsoft's own aerial photo maps is powered by Virtual Earth and smashes Google to tiny bits when it comes to impact and imagery.

[holger]

The image quality of local.live.com really is good - but I could not find any place outside of the United States (same for Yahoo! Maps).

Google Maps has at least satellite images from most of the world and I can see the building I am in right now in Bangalore, India.

Let's see who provides the best data and images of the world in the long run.

cya,
holger

[thejenn]

Microsoft does still cover less territory, but in some instances, I'll take quality over quantity. Microsoft has gathered these images from planes, not satallites, so I expect it will take a while for them to expand their coverage outside of the U.S.

It will be interesting to see how it all goes though...

[Franklinss]

I agree with you that Microsoft's implementation is much better than Google, with better features, better graphics, and better "bird eye view" pictures. But they still have horrible satellite pictures. What's up with that ? Still Google has the community, and I don't think the feature set of Microsoft is so comparatively spectacular that users will defect from Google.

[sisterpine]

Unfortunately with most of the sites if not all you are dealing with very old photos unless you live in a major metro area. I know the newest photos I can find of my area are 16 years old! Yup I live in a very rural area.

[aledge]

As a Google Local/Maps & Earth fanatic, I had to check out what Jennifer was touting as Microsoft’s Windows Live Local’s victory over Google Local (certainly they win for wordiest name). She provides 3 dramatic examples of superior images that are all the same thing, Bird’s Eye View.

In sum: Yes, Bird’s Eye View of major U.S. cities is a sick feature, but that’s about where Window Live Local’s sexiness stops.

It’s not super easy to navigate the thumbnails and you often lose your place. Having to scroll to see the whole image is kind of lame, and the overlap of images can get confusing. Also, it’s a let down for some landmarks. Try getting a Bird’s Eye View of the Transamerica Pyramid in San Francisco, and you’ll see what I’m talking about.

The zoomed in images in Windows Live Local are indeed superior to Google’s in terms of detail, however they’re taken directly overheard, perpendicular to the earth thus giving an exceedingly two-dimensional view. Google’s images are slightly askew lending perspective so you get a sense of height of surrounding buildings and terrain features. Again, see Transamerica Pyramid in SF (from the aerial view, not Bird’s Eye).

But most importantly, for finding addresses, businesses, and everything else, Google Local’s interface is much cleaner, smarter (WLL requires a zip code where GL doesn't, e.g. 715 e 300 s salt lake city), has a broader view, and loads more useful features. And one search box is far better than two.

Finally, it’s important to understand the distinctions of all of these cool maps products Jennifer references in her piece. Google Maps was integrated with Google Local (maps.google.com and local.google.com now go to the same page) and is now one web driven product.

Google Earth is a completely separate (free) application that you download (if you don’t have it, get it now: http://earth.google.com). If traveling and navigating the globe are your thing, then Google Earth is hours of fun with a huge community to share tours and points of interest with. Windows Live Local is trying to compete with Google Local and Earth by offering Earth like features in a web driven product, but it falls far short of Local and Earth’s combined features. True, Google Earth is standalone, but it’s so much cooler than Windows Live Local that it’s well worth the download. It might not have Bird’s Eye View, but it has myriad more useful features that smash WLL to tiny bits.

[thejenn]

Excellent counter review!

Google’s images are slightly askew lending perspective so you get a sense of height of surrounding buildings and terrain features. Again, see Transamerica Pyramid in SF (from the aerial view, not Bird’s Eye).

To note, I've actually found it to be opposite. The Bird's Eye Views in WLL are taken from an airplane. That's one of the reasons that I was surprised that they had such high detail of my tiny little town. (Yet they don't have that high detail of downtown Columbus or OSU...) The Google images are taken by satallite, thus, they are taken from directly above. In almost any search I did, if there was a bird's eye view, it provided much more "definition" than did anything on Google Maps.

That said, i agree that the navigation is clunky. Google has spoiled us with the amazing ability to simply click and drag throughout the images. I can drag my way across the entire country if I want. WLL needs to work on getting this ability in place.

Overall, I still use Google for mapping...but if I want a good, close image of something, I now try WLL first.

Both have their benefits and it still remains to see who will win, but if WLL can put together a competitive interface, the quality of their images will take them above and beyond what Google is currently capable of.

[w_dragon]

Google images are not all taken by satellite. Taking images by satellite at the resolution that many google maps images are at is not realistic for a non-military organization. If you search for "source of pictures for google earth" you will find that google uses whatever method they think will work best, which will always be better than going with any one method for all shots.

Also I checked Windows Live Beta for Cedar Point (the 3rd picture in the article) and the no longer seem to offer a bird's eye view for it, if they ever did...

[pete]

For someone from the days of free folding maps at the local "pump it for you, check the oil and wipe your windshield" service station days, having a duel over which overhead view of your chimney is superior does seem like picking nits.

I'd say that "d-Any of the above" is more than any of us expected to ever have, even 10 years ago.

While I'm certain there are many professionals whose jobs are greatly aided by such things, for the average user they are all pretty neat.

And they could all use a bit of tinkering. But I am not the one to complain, and definitely not the one to tinker.

If you're not happy with what's offered, design your own. The old better mousetrap scenario. And you'll have no problem having the entire world beating a path to your door, since your improved version can include a red x at your front door.