What is the practicality of flyover mapping?

[Parise]

Since when has Google had 3D maps? Apple has a satellite view too but satellite view isn't a 3D map. Neither is Street View. Google is the one playing catchup here when you're referring to Apple's 3D maps.

Technically speaking, google has had 3D maps without actual building textures for a while:

http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/3d/

Also, their new 3D maps looks amazing. Not sure what you were watching...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Douyfa7l8

If you're going to re-invent the wheel, at least do it right IMO.

 

[newagemac]

Technically speaking, google has had 3D maps without actual building textures for a while:

http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/3d/

Also, their new 3D maps looks amazing. Not sure what you were watching...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Douyfa7l8

If you're going to re-invent the wheel, at least do it right IMO.

Here is a comparison between Google's so called "3D" maps in their Google Maps and Apple's 3D maps in their Apple Maps app. As you can see, Google has a whole lot of catching up to do.

According to their press conference, they do plan to add something more comparable to Apple's fully textured 3D maps but it's only coming to Google Earth and with no timeframe given. The Google Maps application seemingly is being left hung out to dry. Sounds to me like they got caught flat footed.

Google's "3D" map on the left and Apple's 3D map on the right:

 

[Electric turd]

Here is a comparison between Google's so called "3D" maps in their Google Maps and Apple's 3D maps in their Apple Maps app. As you can see, Google has a whole lot of catching up to do.

According to their press conference, they do plan to add something more comparable to Apple's fully textured 3D maps but it's only coming to Google Earth and with no timeframe given. The Google Maps application seemingly is being left hung out to dry. Sounds to me like they got caught flat footed.

Google's "3D" map on the left and Apple's 3D map on the right:

Really? Flat footed? The apple image is from "flyover". Google earth on the computer has had a 3d mode for years so if anything apple is playing catch up. No real time frame for apple either. At least there is a good chance I will be able to use the google one on my old iphone 4.

 

[ajvizzgamer101]

Because unlike street view you aren't limited to streets and paths... But it still has a long way to go till it's perfect.

 

[newagemac]

Really? Flat footed? The apple image is from "flyover". Google earth on the computer has had a 3d mode for years so if anything apple is playing catch up. No real time frame for apple either. At least there is a good chance I will be able to use the google one on my old iphone 4.

Google Earth is an entirely different application that just shows satellite pictures. It's not a mapping and turn by turn navigation app. And it doesn't do the kind of real time 3D rendering that Apple is doing right now in iOS6 and that Google plans to bring to Google Earth sometime in the future.

And why do you think it's not part of Google Maps? Because that kind of integration with a full fledge mapping solution is very difficult to do and seamlessly integrate. By only adding it to Google Earth, Google Maps got caught flat footed when it comes to 3D rendering.

Google Maps apparently won't have anything close to the 3D maps Apple has in their Maps application. They only stated they were bringing 3D to Google Earth so they have a whole lot of catching up to do.

 

[matttye]

Google Earth is an entirely different application that just shows satellite pictures. It's not a mapping and turn by turn navigation app. And it doesn't do the kind of real time 3D rendering that Apple is doing right now in iOS6 and that Google plans to bring to Google Earth sometime in the future.

And why do you think it's not part of Google Maps? Because that kind of integration with a full fledge mapping solution is very difficult to do and seamlessly integrate. By only adding it to Google Earth, Google Maps got caught flat footed when it comes to 3D rendering.

Google Maps apparently won't have anything close to the 3D maps Apple has in their Maps application. They only stated they were bringing 3D to Google Earth so they have a whole lot of catching up to do.

Googles 3D maps are being implemented in maps too. Not sure where you're getting your info from

Edit: there's conflicting information on this so you're probably right!

 

[Electric turd]

If anyhing Apple is playing catch up. They are late to the party with more "beta" stuff.
Ever seen this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Douyfa7l8&feature=player_embedded

 

[burnside]

Here is a comparison between Google's so called "3D" maps in their Google Maps and Apple's 3D maps in their Apple Maps app. As you can see, Google has a whole lot of catching up to do.

According to their press conference, they do plan to add something more comparable to Apple's fully textured 3D maps but it's only coming to Google Earth and with no timeframe given. The Google Maps application seemingly is being left hung out to dry. Sounds to me like they got caught flat footed.

Google's "3D" map on the left and Apple's 3D map on the right:

Still, what is the practicality of flyover mapping? You show two photos, but the more practical one is the Google image if I need directions to a place. Flyover is something that is nice to look at, but as far as using it when following directions to a place, it's more glitter than anything else.

 

[matttye]

Still, what is the practicality of flyover mapping? You show two photos, but the more practical one is the Google image if I need directions to a place. Flyover is something that is nice to look at, but as far as using it when following directions to a place, it's more glitter than anything else.

That's what I was trying to say earlier, but some people were arguing that it would be easier to navigate using flyover mapping rather than regular 2D street mapping. Imo the only information you need to navigate is the name of the street you need to turn into and the direction that said street is in!

 

[newagemac]

If anyhing Apple is playing catch up. They are late to the party with more "beta" stuff.
Ever seen this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Douyfa7l8&feature=player_embedded

Yes I and many others laughed at that hastily put together press conference a week before WWDC when Google realized Apple was kicking them out and adding their own Maps solution to be revealed at WWDC.

What was even more pathetic is they announced their solution was only coming to Google Earth. What the heck happened to Google Maps? Left out of the party it seems. My guess is they didn't want to pay for all that bandwidth for something like that which if implemented on Google Maps would be used very often. Google Earth doesn't get nearly as much use. The advertising model probably can't support the costs in Maps. Text ads on the search engine is one thing but 3D renderings is a whole other beast. Or maybe they just got caught flat footed. It's anyone's guess though why Google Maps is being left behind in 3D.

You have got to watch the live blog of that press conference though. It was almost universally panned by anyone who watched it. Even I was surprised how pathetic they looked trying to upstage Apple with nothing really to show and no timeframe.

At the end of the day here it what we're left with for the foreseeable future when it comes to 3D maps in Google Maps compared to 3D maps in Apple Maps:

 

[pdqgp]

Serious question: Have most of you never used this view on your GPS?

Image
Holy crap! I'm flying above my car!

Because I thought that was pretty common. Many of you seem astounded by the concept.

I never use that view on my GPS systems. I much prefer 2D mode with North up; just like one would use a map. I navigate by N-E-S-W and never left and right and prefer my maps flat.

I do like the street view overlay as it's useful, especially in areas I'm not familiar with and have no idea what my detestation looks like. I highly doubt I'll use an aerial 3D view.

 

[burnside]

That's what I was trying to say earlier, but some people were arguing that it would be easier to navigate using flyover mapping rather than regular 2D street mapping. Imo the only information you need to navigate is the name of the street you need to turn into and the direction that said street is in!

One day we will have holographic mapping sitting on our dashboards, lol.

I'll tell you, I've had GPS in my cars since 2004 and the best one I have used was the first one from 2004 of all things! I honestly do not need to look at the map on the screen because the audio (voice and bell warnings) are so spot on when guiding me to my location. I've had nav units with the birds-eye view, but even that seemed like a gimmick to me. The generic 2D view was more than enough.

Even when I look for directions online when on vacation I look at the non satellite view because I am just interested in the roads/highways.

 

[matttye]

Yes I and many others laughed at that hastily put together press conference a week before WWDC when Google realized Apple was kicking them out and adding their own Maps solution to be revealed at WWDC.

What was even more pathetic is they announced their solution was only coming to Google Earth. What the heck happened to Google Maps? Left out of the party it seems. My guess is they didn't want to pay for all that bandwidth for something like that which if implemented on Google Maps would be used very often. Google Earth doesn't get nearly as much use. The advertising model probably can't support the costs in Maps. Text ads on the search engine is one thing but 3D renderings is a whole other beast. Or maybe they just got caught flat footed. It's anyone's guess though why Google Maps is being left behind in 3D.

You have got to watch the live blog of that press conference though. It was almost universally panned by anyone who watched it. Even I was surprised how pathetic they looked trying to upstage Apple with nothing really to show and no timeframe.

At the end of the day here it what we're left with for the foreseeable future when it comes to 3D maps in Google Maps compared to 3D maps in Apple Maps:

It could just be that they've separated the flashy-but-impractical-flyover feature from the tried and tested mapping and navigation features.

Google Earth is a bit of a flashy, gimmicky application that has no real practical use, but was a bit of a wow factor when first released. That's exactly what flyovers are like.

Clearly a 2D street map is the easiest to use for finding your way around for a number of reasons.

 

[newagemac]

Still, what is the practicality of flyover mapping? You show two photos, but the more practical one is the Google image if I need directions to a place. Flyover is something that is nice to look at, but as far as using it when following directions to a place, it's more glitter than anything else.

I don't think you understand how close you can zoom in with flyover. And you can go almost parallel with the surface as well as pan around 360 degrees. Have you even tried it yet? Pictures really don't do it justice because it is so interactive.

Street View forces you to stay on a particular street or path. There isn't much flexibility. Flyover is like imagining you were Superman and you can see any angle you want, can fly in as close or far out as you want, go as high or low to the ground as you want, rotate around 360 degrees, or any combination of these in between... with the buildings and everything rendered in photo realistic 3D in real time.

You can't do that in Street View. This is something entirely different.

I would use flyover if I wanted to get a detailed idea of the buildings and areas of a location. Say for instance I'm going to the downtown area of a major city or visiting a large park or something. The 3D maps would work much better than the limited range of movement you can do with something like Street View. You can get a real good idea up close and personal of a large area pretty fast with it. And not just some overhead Satellite view.

Street View is fine for what it is like getting just a street level view of a particular address. And 2D maps are great for the actual navigation part. But the 3D maps fulfill another entirely different need perfectly.

 

[Ljohnson72]

It's interesting to see how Apple's getting rid of Google Maps, and as a result, Street View, for a product that is in no way comparable to Street View, results in the rationalization that Flyover is just as good as / better than Street View. I too love Apple, but let's be real here. Flyover seems pretty cool in concept, but when I'm walking around in Manhattan, Flyover is not going to help me nearly as much as Street View. Furthermore, how long will it even take until Flyover is as extensive as Street View? I have never encountered a location where Street View wasn't available; I even used it in the outskirts of Wichita, Kansas without problem.

 

[newagemac]

It's interesting to see how Apple's getting rid of Google Maps, and as a result, Street View, for a product that is in no way comparable to Street View, results in the rationalization that Flyover is just as good as / better than Street View. I too love Apple, but let's be real here. Flyover seems pretty cool in concept, but when I'm walking around in Manhattan, Flyover is not going to help me nearly as much as Street View. Furthermore, how long will it even take until Flyover is as extensive as Street View? I have never encountered a location where Street View wasn't available; I even used it in the outskirts of Wichita, Kansas without problem.

For the umpteenth time, Flyover isn't a replacement for Street View. It serves an entirely different need. You likely wouldn't use Flyover while walking around. Street View is for a very narrowed down and specific view. Flyover is for a more general but highly detailed view as well as more interactive because of all the panning and zooming capabilities. They serve different purposes.

 

[burnside]

I don't think you understand how close you can zoom in with flyover. And you can go almost parallel with the surface as well as pan around 360 degrees. Have you even tried it yet? Pictures really don't do it justice because it is so interactive.

Nope, haven't used it, only saw the keynote video. Can it show the name of the store signs or the address numbers on the building? I use that on Street View all the time.

Street View forces you to stay on a particular street or path. There isn't much flexibility. Flyover is like imagining you were Superman and you can see any angle you want, can fly in as close or far out as you want, go as high or low to the ground as you want, rotate around 360 degrees, or any combination of these in between... with the buildings and everything rendered in photo realistic 3D in real time.

I need directions from here to there, not a Superman simulation.

 

[Ljohnson72]

For the umpteenth time, Flyover isn't a replacement for Street View. It serves an entirely different need. You likely wouldn't use Flyover while walking around. Street View is for a very narrowed down and specific view. Flyover is for a more general but highly detailed view as well as more interactive because of all the panning and zooming capabilities. They serve different purposes.

I'm referring to the numerous people on this forum that are saying that Flyover is an acceptable replacement to Street View.

Flyover is cool to use for a bit, but are you honestly going to use it often? Yes, looking at a 3D version of San Francisco is awesome, but it's not that helpful for me in navigating around town. I am fully aware that they serve different purposes; my point is that Flyover is ultimately not as useful as Street View.

 

[virginblue4]

I believe that flyover will be MUCH more useful to me when driving than streetview ever was.

Don't get me wrong, I like streetview, but this tops it 100% and to me will be much more useful!

 

[Tech198]

...

I think it is very useful, it's great to see the actual buildings like your above the street so you can easily and quickly tell where you are/where you need to go and then you can quickly see a Birdseye veiw when needed.

.... or if you can't afford a flight.

 

[newagemac]

Nope, haven't used it, only saw the keynote video. Can it show the name of the store signs or the address numbers on the building? I use that on Street View all the time.



I need directions from here to there, not a Superman simulation.

So let me get this straight. You have no idea how a highly detailed birds eye view of a location that you can zoom in on and pan around buildings is useful in a mapping context?

Maybe you should reserve judgement until you've actually used it then.

 

[Brenz]

Flyover is cool to use for a bit, but are you honestly going to use it often? Yes, looking at a 3D version of San Francisco is awesome, but it's not that helpful for me in navigating around town. I am fully aware that they serve different purposes; my point is that Flyover is ultimately not as useful as Street View.

I disagree, when Flyover is available where you want it I think it provides a much better view of the area if you were trying to find somewhere. Take a look at the two attachments below. One is the view from Street View and the other from Flyover. With Flyover not only can you see further but you get a better sense of where you are and you can easily look around the corner without needing to work through multiple points in Street View.

 

[8a22a]

Flyover could quite easily allow you to fly down streets if more detail was added.

 

[212rikanmofo]

With Apple's flyover mode I can literally take a virtual roadtrip from my couch! Virtual vacation here I come, and not to mention I don't have to spend any money for gas either! Flyover mode looks amazing!

 

[Ljohnson72]

I disagree, when Flyover is available where you want it I think it provides a much better view of the area if you were trying to find somewhere. Take a look at the two attachments below. One is the view from Street View and the other from Flyover. With Flyover not only can you see further but you get a better sense of where you are and you can easily look around the corner without needing to work through multiple points in Street View.

In Street View I am able to do a 360 of my surrounding area to see where exactly I am based on on the fronts of buildings. Furthermore, I find the actual street level view to be FAR more useful. If I am walking around a city trying to find a store, with Street View I can see that "Oh, the Apple store is right next to the Rite Aide," or something similar. With Flyover, the view will be at an angle, making it harder to see specific store fronts.

Perhaps the time Street View comes most in handy is when planning a trip. With Street View, before I depart, I am able to see the what my destination looks like and the places next to it. With Flyover, I cannot do this. Sure, I can get a birds-eye view, but it doesn't replace a street-level view, considering that I too will be on street level.

Finally, it will take YEARS, if it at all, for Flyover coverage to match Street View's.

Flyover has its uses; however, Street View and Flyover and not interchangable.