Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
Martijn van Exel wrote: there's bound to be people slave-mapping for GMM that would contribute to OSM instead if 1) they knew about it or 2) it were easier to get started. If we had more than five people coding on the main site then maybe we could start to fix 2. ;) We're kind of hamstrung by the fact that so few people contribute code to the main site (by which I mean osm.org and P2), but we have thousands of eager mappers asking these few people to improve more and more things. Though we do try, it's difficult to tell the eager mappers sorry, I haven't got time to scratch your particular itch, I've got some work to do to improve OSM's UI for new mappers. If you'd like to help improve OSM's ease of use, and I agree that would be terrific, Write Some Code! cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Google-Map-Maker-gets-a-UI-overhaul-tp7094878p7096438.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
Martijn van Exel wrote: We're definitely losing (potential) mappers to GMM. I don't have to tell you that's a shame -- all that effort going into creating non-free data. But how do we divert some of that energy to OSM? Well, let's ask a Map Maker user: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=14666 I'm under the impression that a large part of Google's attractiveness is due to their *really* high-quality applications and services. We have nice maps, but they have a search function that works, routing, aerial imagery, the ability to make your own map overlays, official smartphone apps with vector rendering, and so on. For people who are primarily motivated by applications they can use today, rather than the potential for future applications, we're just not that attractive - at least as far as mainstream applications are concerned. Tobias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
On Dec 14, 2011, at 1:48 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote: Martijn van Exel wrote: We're definitely losing (potential) mappers to GMM. I don't have to tell you that's a shame -- all that effort going into creating non-free data. But how do we divert some of that energy to OSM? Well, let's ask a Map Maker user: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=14666 I'm under the impression that a large part of Google's attractiveness is due to their *really* high-quality applications and services. We have nice maps, but they have a search function that works, routing, aerial imagery, the ability to make your own map overlays, official smartphone apps with vector rendering, and so on. For people who are primarily motivated by applications they can use today, rather than the potential for future applications, we're just not that attractive - at least as far as mainstream applications are concerned. I think we'll see this start to change, and soon. All I can provide is anecdata, but I have been seeing a slow but consistent upward trend in new map clients asking specifically for OpenStreetMap cartography and mapping projects even if they don't know what that actually *means*, because they believe that they're about to be taken to the cleaners for their GMaps API usage. GMM is improving its story but they're also 100% on the hook for providing those high-quality applications and services. They can accept no help in this regard, except by appropriating the terminology of free and open data. -mike. michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 1:21 PM, pec...@gmail.com pec...@gmail.com wrote: 2011. gada 14. decembris 21:57 Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org rakstīja: I didn't even know that GMM had introduced peer reviewed edits, apparently they did so a while ago. 'Review some contributions and get yours reviewed faster' is what it told me when I logged in. And now they overhauled the UI to make it that much easier to contribute. We're definitely losing (potential) mappers to GMM. I don't have to tell you that's a shame -- all that effort going into creating non-free data. But how do we divert some of that energy to OSM? You have numbers to confirm these fears? I don't know a single living being who would map for Google. I don't, and I am not trying to approach this with scientific scrutiny. GMM is here, it's innovating, it's super user friendly, and it allows people to do pretty much the same things that we do here at OSM -- to a certain and in many ways very limited extent, that is. I'm willing to bet an OSM cheat mug on it - there's bound to be people slave-mapping for GMM that would contribute to OSM instead if 1) they knew about it or 2) it were easier to get started. We can improve things, for sure, but that's already happening. Peer review comes naturally, but if you wish you can create at least some mockups for similar service for OSM. Peer review is at the core of what OSM is, and yet its power can be leveraged in many more ways than we currently do. I know there's a lot of resistance to gamification (GMM has 'superstar mappers' I believe) but there I think we can learn a thing or two from online knowledge communities that leverage the undeniable fact that there's (local) experts who can 1) guide newcomers and 2) oversee the quality of the (local) data and contributions. It's just not trivial to implement. -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
Tobias Knerr writes: For people who are primarily motivated by applications they can use today, rather than the potential for future applications, we're just not that attractive - at least as far as mainstream applications are concerned. OSMAnd. Offline vector maps. Google Maps can't touch that. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: OSMAnd. Offline vector maps. Google Maps can't touch that. +1 Especially with the OsmAnd update I got from the Android market a few days ago. Offline vector rendering was functional before. Now it's downright beautiful. On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 1:21 PM, pec...@gmail.com pec...@gmail.com wrote: 2011. gada 14. decembris 21:57 Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org rakstīja: We're definitely losing (potential) mappers to GMM. I don't have to tell you that's a shame -- all that effort going into creating non-free data. But how do we divert some of that energy to OSM? You have numbers to confirm these fears? I don't know a single living being who would map for Google. I don't, and I am not trying to approach this with scientific scrutiny. I can say that enough people in my city were interested in adding data to the map that they duplicated much of the detail that I have entered into OSM over the last 1.5 within about a month after GMM launched in the US. It was rather depressing to me personally. I'm convinced that it is mostly just a publicity problem. Everyone knows google. They truly are ubiquitous. OSM is lucky to get any kind of mention on slashdot. If google would put out a blog post and an ad campaign telling people about OSM, I'm pretty sure the API servers would instantly light on fire from the resulting load. When google says anything, millions of people hear it. Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
The Google maps app, via a labs add on, allows you to download offline vector maps! Okay they are only 10sq mi each and you are limited to 10 of them but its still possible. Kev On Dec 15, 2011 3:39 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Tobias Knerr writes: For people who are primarily motivated by applications they can use today, rather than the potential for future applications, we're just not that attractive - at least as far as mainstream applications are concerned. OSMAnd. Offline vector maps. Google Maps can't touch that. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
Hi, On 12/15/2011 03:45 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: innovating leveraged gamification (GMM has 'superstar mappers' I believe) leverage I think you're reading too much off the blurby stuff ;) Thing is: Google has a gazillion more $$$ than we do, and they can buy all of Peru to do UI work for them if they please. They can, if they so desire, buy millions of hardware devices and ship them across the world for mapping, or they can set up a helpdesk in India where every single GMM contributor gets personalised support around the clock. They can do all this and more, and trying to compete with them on such a level won't work. (Someone said we should aim to be #1 online map provider but if people were to request from us even a fraction of the tiles that Google serves we'd blow several fuses.) I think it is inevitable that there *will* be more GMM contributors than there are OSM contributors and it would be foolish to fight that (and foolish to even set oneself the goal). In the long run, at least if Google doesn't lose interest or produces major cock-ups, OSM *will not* be the easier to use collaborative map. It will have a very hard time to be as easy to use as Google, and even that would mean to continuously bind our resources by chasing them rather than doing something of our own design. I know it sounds old-school, and not at all hip and trendy, but the distinguishing factor between us and them is our free license and what you can do with our data as a result. The quirky; the unexpected uses; the interesting things that people try out if they get their hands on our data. It's no use running after Google. We need to get the message across that we're the free alternative, and people will have to accept that we're not as polished as Google are. We are the project for those that understand free and open. Those for whom ease of use is more important than the licensing of the result are not our clientele and we'll never be able to win them over, except by making them understand the importance of free and open. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
