This Just In: googlemaps for bikes!

[jobob]

Well, dump on it all you want (not like you need anyone's permission to do so ).

I think this is a great start and a very admirable endeavor on Google's part.

Sure, like any mapping program, it's nowhere remotely near perfect. Ummm, maybe that's why it's a beta release?

What it does that I think is really good is that it shows were off-street bike paths are located. This is something that many mapping programs simply don't do.

Many of my own tried & true bike routes don't show up, especially the ones that involve hills or narrow roads or roads with moderately heavy traffic. This makes sense to me, since the biking directions are more aimed towards novice or occasional cyclists.

There are going to be routing glitches (it's beta, remember) -- hopefully people will have enough sense to not take the directions as a guaranteed sure thing, but to use them as a planning guide. OK, maybe I'm underestimating the gullibility of the average person here. Maybe Google should overlay the directions with a big "beta" stamp with lots of "use at your own risk" labels. And if you don't like it, ignore it.

Call me a dorky optimist, but I for one am not going to dump on it on day one and throw up my hands and exclaim "why bother?"

[SadieKate]

Sure, like any mapping program, it's nowhere remotely near perfect. Ummm, maybe that's why it's a beta release?

Jo, I'm not talking about the beta or even the bicycling program. Google just doesn't provide accurate maps, directions or recent images in Oregon, period. Doesn't matter whether you're driving, walking, or biking. I have a hard time believing this is unique to Oregon.

[tulip]

I have found google maps to be quite accurate in Virginia, DC, Maryland, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

Just proceed with caution, a backup map, and a bit of humor, as you would in any unfamiliar area.

[IFjane]

I have found google maps to be quite accurate in Virginia, DC, Maryland, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

Just proceed with caution, a backup map, and a bit of humor, as you would in any unfamiliar area.

What Tulip said! Also, note that, just as with Google maps driving directions, the bike maps also let you drag & drop to change your route. Very helpful if you already have some idea of the area you are in.

My recent experience with Mapquest is that they don't know where I live - yet Google does.

As for the comment about Mapmyrun/ride: did you let them know about the virus? Shouldn't that ad be removed? I am a member so don't have to worry about ads, but still, it could happen somewhere else. ack!

[Mr. Bloom]

I routed a ride to Indianapolis from Bloomington.

It took me straight up Highway 37 (the location of the drafting incident in Breaking Away). Suffice it to say that "that ain't gonna happen"...right Indysteel???

But, I found the trails and bike routes to be accurate and appropriate. Personally, I think it's a great start and I'm glad that they're doing it - even if it's not perfect yet.

Perfection will be achieved when a small group of more knowledgable local riders in each community start contributing to improving it from good to great.

[Tri Girl]

I just googled the route I take downtown, and it had me going on two VERY busy (and totally inappropriate) roads. The way I go isn't even on there and while it might be a couple miles longer, it's on residential streets with little to no traffic.
I think it's a great concept- and perhaps with a little input it will be even better. I mean- they can't know EVERY community in America. That's where we come in to suggest better routings.

[andtckrtoo]

I just routed the ride I did from San Jose to Santa Cruz last week and it had me doing pretty much the same route. It took me the back way out of my neighborhood across a busy street where there is no traffic light (but there are bike lanes), but hey, it's pretty accurate. Although, as Google's HQ is here in the Bay Area, the accuracy here is not surprising.

I've never had issues with GoogleMaps here in California either. Although, my tool of choice is my iPhone map because that goes with me on rides - wish they had the same feature. I do like the "You are Here" on the iPhone which has saved my butt many a time.

[GLC1968]

I have a hard time believing this is unique to Oregon.

It might be. Google was our tool of choice when we lived in NC and we never had an issue - ever. That's why we were so shocked how lousy it was when we moved here...

[MartianDestiny]

Well, dump on it all you want (not like you need anyone's permission to do so ).

I think this is a great start and a very admirable endeavor on Google's part.

Sure, like any mapping program, it's nowhere remotely near perfect. Ummm, maybe that's why it's a beta release?

What it does that I think is really good is that it shows were off-street bike paths are located. This is something that many mapping programs simply don't do.

Many of my own tried & true bike routes don't show up, especially the ones that involve hills or narrow roads or roads with moderately heavy traffic. This makes sense to me, since the biking directions are more aimed towards novice or occasional cyclists.

There are going to be routing glitches (it's beta, remember) -- hopefully people will have enough sense to not take the directions as a guaranteed sure thing, but to use them as a planning guide. OK, maybe I'm underestimating the gullibility of the average person here. Maybe Google should overlay the directions with a big "beta" stamp with lots of "use at your own risk" labels. And if you don't like it, ignore it.

Call me a dorky optimist, but I for one am not going to dump on it on day one and throw up my hands and exclaim "why bother?"

+1

To add something about the satellite imagery. A lot of times there isn't much Google can do about this. They don't own the satellites. This means a few things:

1) Targets aren't picked based on what is needed for convenience views in mapping software. Hi-res (enough to do the near street view and see individual cars and houses) mapping of residential/commercial areas in the US is simply NOT high priority. Once they are imaged once (if that) they don't get re-imaged at high res (hence the fact that 10yr old data really is sometimes the best that you can do).

These are military and scientific satellites. Target priority has nothing to do with street view level mapping and that kind of resolution puts a large load on the spacecraft (they are BIG files) which limits "mission critical" data downlink.

2) Google simply may not have access to up-to-date reasonable to hi-res shots even if they exist. These images are typically either OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive or government classified. As a scientist wanting maps for research purposes I can expect to pay $5,000 up to 10's of thousands for up to date hi-res area maps (of not very big areas)!!! Commercial use release of this private data comes at a very hefty fee (if at all). Government lag can be months or more if they are even imaging the area at high-res (see above).

To update the grey outline of a newly built store on a FREE mapping utility, well I can see their reasons for not buying it even if available, and waiting for the cheaper/free stuff to come out.

3) All that "Street View" stuff is shot by Google (or Microsoft, but something tells me they aren't exactly sharing data) with special vehicles with special 360* camera mounts. Think about how much money and time it takes to drive through every single residential street in America. They haven't been at it that long either (a few years).

4) Different private maps could be in different formats/data types/etc. that make them more difficult to work with than it's really worth even if they are available and reasonably priced.

So while company A may be more up-to-date in one area than another they are almost certainly behind in another area. That's just the way it goes for any of a number of reasons.


Yes, Google maps has its bugs, it also has its many conveniences and attributes. Personally, I find the latter far outweighs the former.