Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Maps - Offline GPS - Vacation In Italy - Data Charges?

boltjames

boltjames

macrumors 601
Original poster
May 2, 2010
4,876
2,852
I'm vacationing in Sicily for a week and will use my iPhone 5 for turn-by-turn navigation extensively. I'm with AT&T and I don't want to eat up my data plan for the sake of GPS.

I've read about Google Maps offline and have had my iPhone download the maps for the territory I'll be covering in Italy.

Questions I hope you can help me answer:

1. Since I've downloaded all the map data and will have it locally stored on the phone, can I leave my iPhone's 4G/LTE antenna on for other purposes or will that trick the iPhone into re-downloading the maps?

2. If I must turn off Cellular Data in order to avoid racking up charges, will there be any issues with turn-by-turn navigation as a result of those antennae being disabled?

Hoping someone who has used Google Maps offline in a foreign country might be able to answer.

TIA

BJ
 
1. It will download any data you missed. Likely, some data will be used.
2. Navigation won't work at all.
 
Whoa, thanks everyone. Didn't realize that data needed to be 'on' even for offline navigation, seems quite unintuitive.

I read somewhere here once that Apple Maps uses a lot less data than Google Maps while driving with turn-by-turn directions, something like 5x less data which could solve my problem.

Can anyone confirm this?

Thanks again.

BJ

----------
stu.h said:
Get TomTom Italy?
Click to expand...

I could, but that's $45 I'd rather not spend.

I'm getting the 120MB data plan from ATT for $30 for the trip and so long as three days of driving will be covered within that I'd rather cap it at that.

BJ
 
boltjames said:
Whoa, thanks everyone. Didn't realize that data needed to be 'on' even for offline navigation, seems quite unintuitive.
Click to expand...

It isn't quite unintuitive because with Apple or Google Maps, there is no such thing as "offline navigation" and there won't be anytime in the foreseeable future.
 
[/COLOR]

I could, but that's $45 I'd rather not spend.

I'm getting the 120MB data plan from ATT for $30 for the trip and so long as three days of driving will be covered within that I'd rather cap it at that.

BJ[/QUOTE]

Did you look into NavFree? You do not need a data cxtn.
Also, TMobile allows free Intl roaming on their plans. I know you are with ATT but if you think you may travel lots in the future, think about switching.
 
GoSh4rks said:
It isn't quite unintuitive because with Apple or Google Maps, there is no such thing as "offline navigation" and there won't be anytime in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Well, Google themselves call it "offline" but I'm guessing you're saying it'll put a map in my phone but not allow the turn-by-turn?

I found the article online that shows how Apple Maps is 5x less data-hungry than Google Maps. Makes me think Apple Maps is the answer.

But if I downloaded the Google map in Italy I need (done already) using its 'offline' feature would that make Google Maps less data-consuming than Apple Maps?

The idea here is that I'm trying to use an iPhone map for turn-by-turn connected properly but not using a ton of data and getting hit with ridiculous charges, if one scenario is better than the other in that regard please advise.

Thanks!

BJ
 
boltjames said:
Well, Google themselves call it "offline" but I'm guessing you're saying it'll put a map in my phone but not allow the turn-by-turn?

I found the article online that shows how Apple Maps is 5x less data-hungry than Google Maps. Makes me think Apple Maps is the answer.

But if I downloaded the Google map in Italy I need (done already) using its 'offline' feature would that make Google Maps less data-consuming than Apple Maps?

The idea here is that I'm trying to use an iPhone map for turn-by-turn connected properly but not using a ton of data and getting hit with ridiculous charges, if one scenario is better than the other in that regard please advise.

Thanks!

BJ
Click to expand...

There is no offline turn by turn. Only map data is saved.

The 5x-less-data comparisons are from when Apple maps first came out in 2012. Google maps has since been updated to also use vector graphics and I imagine that the data amounts are fairly comparable now.
 
Why not use the traditional paper map? Have people forgotten that these exist lol?

The offline map on Google Maps can be used, just without live turn-by-trun navigation.
 
The best approach, which I'm currently doing, is to have an unlocked phone, get a cheap Italian sim plus phone or data plan for €20 or less and have 1 GB, and just use Google maps or Apple maps regularly.
 
MarkCollette said:
The best approach, which I'm currently doing, is to have an unlocked phone, get a cheap Italian sim plus phone or data plan for €20 or less and have 1 GB, and just use Google maps or Apple maps regularly.
Click to expand...

I need to use my iPhone for work during my travels and can't swap SIM's cards in/out frequently, just won't work.

Thanks though.

----------
GoSh4rks said:
There is no offline turn by turn. Only map data is saved.

The 5x-less-data comparisons are from when Apple maps first came out in 2012. Google maps has since been updated to also use vector graphics and I imagine that the data amounts are fairly comparable now.
Click to expand...

Thanks for all the help Sharks.

Is there definitive evidence that indeed Google Maps and Apple Maps now consume the same type of limited data? Short of doing an A/B test myself for a few days here in the US, would love to know so there are no surprises once over there.

Best,

BJ
 
boltjames said:
I need to use my iPhone for work during my travels and can't swap SIM's cards in/out frequently, just won't work.
Click to expand...

We brought an iPad mini with us, the idea being that we'd keep our original home sims in our phones and use the local Italian sim in the tablet for data and have the larger screen for mapping and web browsing, and be able to make hotspots for the iPhones. That might be better for you if you have a tablet or are willing to buy/borrow one for the trip. Tablet sims are even cheaper or for the same price get you 2 GB instead of 1 for a phone sim that gives you SMS and phone minutes. I got TIM but WIND is much cheaper. Not everyone has multiple devices or is traveling with someone with another device or has unlocked devices, but if you have some other device I'd recommend a local sim. I ended up getting one for my phone instead of the tablet since I needed to make more local calls then I had anticipated.
 
My A/B test results on an iPhone 5 running latest firmware all apps/iOS up to date:

(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 3.6 MB (Thursday)
(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 0.3 MB (Friday)

(Google Maps) to home: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 2.1 MB (Thursday)

The first test (Apple Maps Thursday) I did not shut off push email which likely clouded the numbers. Either that, or not having used Apple Maps to commute it had a one-time download of map data, thus the 3.6 MB reading.

Today, same identical drive (Apple Maps Friday) with push email turned off the identical ride was only 348KB which is insanely tiny.

Google Maps did the identical ride yesterday (the commute home) and came in at 2.1 MB and that was with push email turned off- we'll see today on my ride home if it was also the first-time map download that put it over the edge.

At this point, both mapping solutions would be well under the 120MB international data plan I'm purchasing, and I'll test it again but Apple Maps looks to be so efficient with data that the need for any type of offline GPS in Italy might be nill.

BJ
 
Google Maps - Offline GPS - Vacation In Italy - Data Charges?

boltjames said:
Whoa, thanks everyone. Didn't realize that data needed to be 'on' even for offline navigation, seems quite unintuitive.

I read somewhere here once that Apple Maps uses a lot less data than Google Maps while driving with turn-by-turn directions, something like 5x less data which could solve my problem.

Can anyone confirm this?

Thanks again.

BJ

----------
Click to expand...



That used to be the case but Google changed they're mapping. Data usage will be relatively similar.

----------
boltjames said:
My A/B test results on an iPhone 5 running latest firmware all apps/iOS up to date:



(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 3.6 MB (Thursday)

(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 0.3 MB (Friday)



(Google Maps) to home: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 2.1 MB (Thursday)



The first test (Apple Maps Thursday) I did not shut off push email which likely clouded the numbers. Either that, or not having used Apple Maps to commute it had a one-time download of map data, thus the 3.6 MB reading.



Today, same identical drive (Apple Maps Friday) with push email turned off the identical ride was only 348KB which is insanely tiny.



Google Maps did the identical ride yesterday (the commute home) and came in at 2.1 MB and that was with push email turned off- we'll see today on my ride home if it was also the first-time map download that put it over the edge.



At this point, both mapping solutions would be well under the 120MB international data plan I'm purchasing, and I'll test it again but Apple Maps looks to be so efficient with data that the need for any type of offline GPS in Italy might be nill.



BJ
Click to expand...


I haven't tested mine in a while but my drive to work which is 15 miles Google used .7 mb more data. This would compound with enough usage I suppose but oddly unlike your test Apple and Google both used over 2 mb.

I would also thoroughly compare the area you'll be traveling abroad before you leave. In Ireland and Tokyo Apple maps was absolutely terrible for me. In the US it's been pretty good.
 
Get navfree Italy.

It's free.
And it provides full turn-by-turn navigation whilst your phone has data roaming switched off.

The interface isn't as intuitive or polished as other maps apps, but it's free!
 
BMcCoy said:
Get navfree Italy.

It's free.
And it provides full turn-by-turn navigation whilst your phone has data roaming switched off.

The interface isn't as intuitive or polished as other maps apps, but it's free!
Click to expand...

Going to download it and give it a try.

Thanks!

BJ
 
UPDATE:

(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 3.6 MB (Thursday)
(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 0.3 MB (Friday)

(Google Maps) to home: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 2.1 MB (Thursday)
(Google Maps) to home: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 2.0 MB (Friday)

Okay folks, I'm going to try this one more time next week to make sure I don't have any dirty data but it does appear that Apple maps is significantly easier on the data than Google maps and my clear choice for my trip to Italy.

I will post back in case someone in the future comes across this thread.

BJ
 
boltjames said:
UPDATE:



(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 3.6 MB (Thursday)

(Apple Maps) to work: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 0.3 MB (Friday)



(Google Maps) to home: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 2.1 MB (Thursday)

(Google Maps) to home: 28 miles, 40 minutes, used 2.0 MB (Friday)



Okay folks, I'm going to try this one more time next week to make sure I don't have any dirty data but it does appear that Apple maps is significantly easier on the data than Google maps and my clear choice for my trip to Italy.



I will post back in case someone in the future comes across this thread.



BJ
Click to expand...


Is that a typo? You have 3.6mb used by Apple maps. That's very inconsistent results if correct.
 
cynics said:
Is that a typo? You have 3.6mb used by Apple maps. That's very inconsistent results if correct.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was likely an accident, I'd left Push email 'on' and I think that skewed the results.

Will test another round on Monday.

BJ
 
Okay, so I tested Waze against Apple Maps today, identical route, Waze on the way out, Apple on the way back, 30 minutes, 19 miles, local streets and highway, the results:

Waze: 1.2MB
Apple: 0.4MB

No matter what turn-by-turn GPS app I test against it, Apple Maps comes up with the lowest data usage of any of 'em. Additionally, I find Apple Maps building detail, smooth scrolling, lag-free reaction, and 3D zoom/turn animations vastly superior to the rest.

Unless Apple Maps puts me in a corn field in Italy, I'm sticking with it.

BJ
 
iolinux333 said:
This is the correct answer.
Click to expand...

Greetings from Italy.

Apple Maps was flawless in Sicily, we drove for several days, got it right each time and we were utterly amazed that even tiny dirt roads that maybe three people a day drive were accurately represented.

Was very low on data, under 20mb the whole way.

Thanks to all who helped advise.

BJ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back