Maps fail (Apple and Google)

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 19, 2018, 12:31:50 PM8/19/18

to

We were going out to a place in the country for which I had the L/L.

I started with Apple Maps and that was fine. Then stopped it and
changed to Google Maps. Fine.

My SO was driving, so as we got within about 40 km, and there were a lot
of turns coming I turned on voice.

Google Maps voice is hilarious when it tries to say French names (road
names, etc.)

So I stopped Google Maps and turned on Apple Maps. Entered the position
in L/L.

We were outside of good cell coverage - Apple Maps hung up. It couldn't
use L/L alone w/o contacting Apple's servers. WTF? The position of the
destination did not show on the map.

So, I killed that, and re-started Google Maps and entered the
destination L/L again. And while it too refused to navigate, at least
the position of the destination appeared on the map, so I could guide my
SO from that.

Both apps failed at this simple task because they are too dependent on
reaching their respective servers in real time.

Once a map is loaded and the position of the destination is known and
that of the vehicle there should be 0 need to contact the server.

--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester

JF Mezei

unread,

Aug 19, 2018, 1:18:33 PM8/19/18

to

On 2018-08-19 12:31, Alan Browne wrote:

> Once a map is loaded and the position of the destination is known and
> that of the vehicle there should be 0 need to contact the server.

Dependa on what they consider "loaded" to be. Is it just the pretty
raster images of map tiles covering the area?

Or are vector data also loaded behind the scenes to allow navigation?

The other question, and this is perhaps more important:

Is it possible that the need to connect is once, (at which point, the
app gets the list of waypoints and what direction to turn, and can then
operate autonomously ?

In other words, had you not switched stuff around and gotten full
directions whyen you left the city and let the app run, would it have
guided you to destination even after you lost cell coverage?

I can understand STARTING navigation failing without internet connection.

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 19, 2018, 2:21:25 PM8/19/18

to

On 2018-08-19 13:18, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2018-08-19 12:31, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Once a map is loaded and the position of the destination is known and
>> that of the vehicle there should be 0 need to contact the server.
>
>
> Dependa on what they consider "loaded" to be. Is it just the pretty
> raster images of map tiles covering the area?
>
> Or are vector data also loaded behind the scenes to allow navigation?
>
> The other question, and this is perhaps more important:
>
> Is it possible that the need to connect is once, (at which point, the
> app gets the list of waypoints and what direction to turn, and can then
> operate autonomously ?

Specifics are not as important as:
- if the app has a map (not raster, but road network)
- and knows where I want to go
- and knows where I am ...

... then it can navigate the way.

In the Apple case it appears it needs to send the desired lat/long
location to a server to in turn do some necessary things for the app.

Really, really silly.

Too bad I left the TomTom in my car.

>
> In other words, had you not switched stuff around and gotten full
> directions whyen you left the city and let the app run, would it have
> guided you to destination even after you lost cell coverage?

Probably to certainly. At least I hope so.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 19, 2018, 4:35:55 PM8/19/18

to

"JF Mezei" <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote in message
news:IDheD.174779$UX7.1...@fx43.iad...

Yep. I used to turn data off before I changed to the current
$10/month plan with unlimited calls and texts to any landline
or cellphone in the country and 1.5GB of data and that works fine.

> I can understand STARTING navigation failing without internet connection.

Even that works fine if you tell it to store the map in the phone
when you have net access.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 19, 2018, 10:32:00 PM8/19/18

to

On 19 Aug 2018 13:29:33 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> Even that works fine if you tell it to store the map in the phone
> when you have net access.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 20, 2018, 12:17:22 PM8/20/18

to

On 19 Aug 2018 09:31:44 GMT, Alan Browne wrote:

> Both apps failed at this simple task because they are too dependent on
> reaching their respective servers in real time.

This solution was just suggested on the Android newsgroups, which "may" be
appropriate here, "if" Apple provides similar functionality (I didn't look
on the Apple App Store to see if you can do the lookup).
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/E_ULJzPy2T8/JKqmlSaTCwAJ>

The basic flow is to use some *other* offline map application (i.e., other
than Google Maps or Apple Maps, both of which have restrictive lookups).

The key trick in the offline-map-app functionality above is to obtain the
latitude/longitude while online (which the OP seems to have, but which most
people might be hard pressed to find for any given address).

Here is a test of the concept that I ran yesterday for that thread:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5287625lookup.jpg>

That flow "might" work for iOS where this is the general idea:
a. You run the L/L lookup while online for *any* given address
(This reports a super *accurate* L/L for any given address.)
b. That lookup automagically sends the L/L to the "Navigate" button
c. That "Navigate" button opens up *any* desired map

In my case, I had set OSMAnd~ as the default, but I could have unset the
default and then it would have asked me to choose between *any* offline map
app installed on the mobile device.

In summary, I only tested this concept on Android yesterday (see the
referenced thread for details - where the point was to avoid Google Maps at
all costs) ...

But this concept of feeding the accurate L/L to any offline map app
*should* work for iOS also (if the address-to-L/L lookup functionality
exists on iOS for looking up the L/L for any given address in the world, as
it does on Android).

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 20, 2018, 12:59:16 PM8/20/18

to

On 20 Aug 2018 16:17:21 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> Here is a test of the concept that I ran yesterday for that thread:
> <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5287625lookup.jpg>

The OP seems to have the Latitude/Longitude (aka L/L) for the desired app,
but for others to benefit, here's how to obtain the L/L for any address in
the world using Apple Maps:
<http://www.idownloadblog.com/2017/04/03/how-to-view-gps-coordinates-location-iphone/>

All we need now is seamless integration of that L/L with *any* offline map
app that the user may have already installed on their iOS device.

There appear to be a few "address-to-coordinate" converters for iOS, e.g.,
* AddressFinder Free, by MISOOK WOO
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/addressfinder-free-zip-ip/id580052119?mt=8>
* AddressFinder, by myice92
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/addressfinder-zipcode-lookup/id1097402595?mt=8>

Another way to find the L/L for any address in the world on iOS is to use
any of these address-to-coodinate web-based lookup engines.
https://getlatlong.net/
https://www.latlong.net/
https://www.gps-coordinates.net/
https://mynasadata.larc.nasa.gov/latitudelongitude-finder/
https://developer.mapquest.com/documentation/tools/latitude-longitude-finder/
etc.

Once you have the L/L for any address in the world, any good offline map
app should be able to route to that L/L address.

What we seek is an *automatic* feeding of that L/L into any offline map!

Having never looked this capability up before yesterday, it's great to see
that iOS (after iOS 5.0) natively allows for a public address-to-coordinate
lookup engine that iOS developers can integrate into their apps.
"We initiate a CLGeocoder object, pass an address to it via the
geocodeAddressString method, and in our completion handler we grab
the last object from the returned array of placemarks and log out
its latitude and longitude coordinates. These coordinates can be
used to drop a pin on a map, be stored in a database, etc."
<https://medium.com/@HolidaySam/converting-between-an-address-and-location-coordinates-natively-in-ios-888f914fe3d4>
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16694409/convert-address-to-longitude-and-latitude>

I searched but haven't yet found an app for iOS that does both well, but it
probably exists, where the goal is:
a. Use soemthing other than Apple or Google maps
b. To obtain an *accurate* L/L for *any* address in the world
c. And then feed *that* accurate L/L to any desired offline map routing app

Note: All offline map apps "purport" to do address lookups - but very few,
if any, are anywhere near as consistently accurate as a Google Map address
lookup (IMHO) - so that's the reason for the additional steps and the
desire for streamlining them.

Chris

unread,

Aug 20, 2018, 1:16:45 PM8/20/18

to

Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
> We were going out to a place in the country for which I had the L/L.
>
> I started with Apple Maps and that was fine. Then stopped it and
> changed to Google Maps. Fine.
>
> My SO was driving, so as we got within about 40 km, and there were a lot
> of turns coming I turned on voice.
>
> Google Maps voice is hilarious when it tries to say French names (road
> names, etc.)

Yep. Had the same in Italy. Made us all laugh when it pronounced Saline as
say-line instead of sa-lee-ne.

> So I stopped Google Maps and turned on Apple Maps. Entered the position
> in L/L.
>
> We were outside of good cell coverage - Apple Maps hung up. It couldn't
> use L/L alone w/o contacting Apple's servers. WTF? The position of the
> destination did not show on the map.
>
> So, I killed that, and re-started Google Maps and entered the
> destination L/L again. And while it too refused to navigate, at least
> the position of the destination appeared on the map, so I could guide my
> SO from that.
>
> Both apps failed at this simple task because they are too dependent on
> reaching their respective servers in real time.
>
> Once a map is loaded and the position of the destination is known and
> that of the vehicle there should be 0 need to contact the server.

There shouldn't, but these apps are designed with always on internet and so
excessive look-ups occur "just in case" it feels like. The lack of
fall-back is poor usability.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 20, 2018, 2:41:23 PM8/20/18

to

On 20 Aug 2018 17:16:45 GMT, Chris wrote:

> There shouldn't, but these apps are designed with always on internet and so
> excessive look-ups occur "just in case" it feels like. The lack of
> fall-back is poor usability.

I will repeat that Google Maps, on a non-GPS iOS WiFi-only iPad worked fine
for both location and routing on offline Google Maps.

I'm not sure why Apple Maps failed miserably in that same test.
<http://i.cubeupload.com/AXV0S1.gif>

Google Maps routing works ok completely offline sans GPS & cellular data.

Start Google Maps offline on an iOS iPad sans both GPS & cellular:
http://i.cubeupload.com/mqIyq9.gif

Route to "San Jose airport terminal B"
http://i.cubeupload.com/1Xu1Ze.gif

Depending on density, your location can be shown surprisingly accurately:
http://i.cubeupload.com/j1qofb.gif

The Google Map app knows your direction based on nearby WiFi access points:
http://i.cubeupload.com/Jg4N8H.gif

The main flaw is that the original route doesn't seem to recalculate:
http://i.cubeupload.com/wsbeK5.gif

Google Maps happily shows your location & direction but not a new route:
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZcSHbq.gif

Even when you're miles off course, Google Maps won't re-route you:
http://i.cubeupload.com/i7OQM5.gif

But, even though you're offline, Google Maps can still track your progress:
http://i.cubeupload.com/n8SHCP.gif

Here I'm at least five miles (or so) off track & Google still won't
re-route:
http://i.cubeupload.com/vTWsf6.gif

A few miles later, Google still thinks I'm heading south when I'm not:
http://i.cubeupload.com/9eGl0p.gif

But Google Maps eventually figures out that I'm heading northward:
http://i.cubeupload.com/islMuS.gif

Where Google Maps grays out the section of the old route you've bypassed:
http://i.cubeupload.com/Ywb7Zr.gif

Even as Google Maps won't re-route - it shows your position & direction:
http://i.cubeupload.com/XZps1p.gif

All the while graying out the areas of the old route you've bypassed:
http://i.cubeupload.com/3J1768.gif

Google Maps continues to show your position when you're in dense areas:
http://i.cubeupload.com/l5gDkM.gif

It often hangs up on one position though, until it can get a new fix:
http://i.cubeupload.com/YxEkk9.gif

But it does give you a general idea, offline, where you're going:
http://i.cubeupload.com/CI1jmZ.gif

It's good enough for rough tracking of where you are and where to go:
http://i.cubeupload.com/AJZUc1.gif

As it hones you in on your position, all without GPS or cellular data:
http://i.cubeupload.com/nvsdj5.gif

It apparently uses Wi-Fi access points such as these near SJC Airport:
http://i.cubeupload.com/J3bcjj.gif

nospam

unread,

Aug 20, 2018, 2:42:59 PM8/20/18

to

In article <plf1r6$sdn$1...@neodome.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> I will repeat that Google Maps, on a non-GPS iOS WiFi-only iPad worked fine
> for both location and routing on offline Google Maps.

location yes. routing, no.

> I'm not sure why Apple Maps failed miserably in that same test.

user error.

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 21, 2018, 9:02:48 PM8/21/18

to

On 2018-08-20 13:16, Chris wrote:

> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:

>> Once a map is loaded and the position of the destination is known and
>> that of the vehicle there should be 0 need to contact the server.
>
> There shouldn't, but these apps are designed with always on internet and so
> excessive look-ups occur "just in case" it feels like. The lack of
> fall-back is poor usability.

It's atrocious, actually.

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 21, 2018, 9:05:50 PM8/21/18

to

No. A map program with the map loaded, location of the user and
location of the destination should navigate w/o needing to contact any
server. Further, they should be able to restart for any reason and
continue.

Apple fail: total (Would not show the position of the destination)

Google fail: workaround (Would not nav, but at least the destination pin
was shown on the map).

But both failed at what is a very simple task.

nospam

unread,

Aug 21, 2018, 9:39:19 PM8/21/18

to

In article <VqSdnZv52Zh0K-HG...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne

<bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:

> >> I will repeat that Google Maps, on a non-GPS iOS WiFi-only iPad worked fine
> >> for both location and routing on offline Google Maps.
> >
> > location yes. routing, no.
> >
> >> I'm not sure why Apple Maps failed miserably in that same test.
> >
> > user error.
>
> No. A map program with the map loaded, location of the user and
> location of the destination should navigate w/o needing to contact any
> server. Further, they should be able to restart for any reason and
> continue.

because you said so? that's not how it works.

both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
internet connection. they do cache map data locally and will work
without internet for a limited range before they need to update for new
map data, typically a 5-10 mile radius, which is good enough for short
trips or while driving through a dead zone. routing is done server-side
and will require internet connectivity to generate a new route, but it
remains active without it.

there are other navigation apps which are designed to be used without
an internet connection. they store map data and can do routing entirely
on the device.

if you need offline routing, choose one of the latter.

expecting the former to do what they were never designed to do is user
error.

badgolferman

unread,

Aug 21, 2018, 10:06:50 PM8/21/18

to

Alan Browne wrote:

>
>We were going out to a place in the country for which I had the L/L.
>
>I started with Apple Maps and that was fine. Then stopped it and
>changed to Google Maps. Fine.
>
>My SO was driving, so as we got within about 40 km, and there were a
>lot of turns coming I turned on voice.
>
>Google Maps voice is hilarious when it tries to say French names
>(road names, etc.)
>
>So I stopped Google Maps and turned on Apple Maps. Entered the
>position in L/L.
>
>We were outside of good cell coverage - Apple Maps hung up. It
>couldn't use L/L alone w/o contacting Apple's servers. WTF? The
>position of the destination did not show on the map.
>
>So, I killed that, and re-started Google Maps and entered the
>destination L/L again. And while it too refused to navigate, at
>least the position of the destination appeared on the map, so I could
>guide my SO from that.
>
>Both apps failed at this simple task because they are too dependent
>on reaching their respective servers in real time.
>
>Once a map is loaded and the position of the destination is known and
>that of the vehicle there should be 0 need to contact the server.

Google Maps has offline maps for any area you want to download. check
out the settings for that.

Chris

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 3:16:50 AM8/22/18

to

Only useful if you planned ahead. Unexpected drop outs of connectivity can
mean that didn't work.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 5:30:52 AM8/22/18

to

"Chris" <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:plj2l1$1sa$1...@dont-email.me...

In fact it works fine with unexpected dropouts.

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 7:54:52 AM8/22/18

to

On 2018-08-21 21:39, nospam wrote:
> In article <VqSdnZv52Zh0K-HG...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I will repeat that Google Maps, on a non-GPS iOS WiFi-only iPad worked fine
>>>> for both location and routing on offline Google Maps.
>>>
>>> location yes. routing, no.
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure why Apple Maps failed miserably in that same test.
>>>
>>> user error.
>>
>> No. A map program with the map loaded, location of the user and
>> location of the destination should navigate w/o needing to contact any
>> server. Further, they should be able to restart for any reason and
>> continue.
>
> because you said so? that's not how it works.
>
> both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
> internet connection. t

Then they badly spec'd navigation apps. Badly designed. Badly implemented.

Why I prefer (for my car) having a standalone GPS device such as a Garmin.

I suppose this experience buttresses the case to purchase an app that
puts all of the map data on my smartphone for when I don't have my
TomTom or Garmin (purchasing soon).

But Google and Apple should really up their game on this - your
apologetic BS for them aside.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 8:20:02 AM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 04:54:47 GMT, Alan Browne wrote:

> I suppose this experience buttresses the case to purchase an app that
> puts all of the map data on my smartphone for when I don't have my
> TomTom or Garmin (purchasing soon).

Why should you need to *purchase* anything?

This is a screenshot of my Android map apps - *all* of which are free.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5191009maps.jpg>

Since I always organize my apps by categories & from best-to-worst in any
category, one can note that the best offline roadmap routing freeware were
found, after testing, to be:
1. Navigator
2. OSMAnd~
3. CoPilot GPS
4. Sygic
5. Navmii USA
And where there were _plenty_ of offline free map apps which were tested
and thrown away before arriving at that conclusion.

I don't route often on the iPad anymore (because my current iPad has no GPS
nor cellular); but if nospam & Jolly Roger are right that iOS has what
Android has, then we should be able to find & use good freeware offline map
apps for iOS too.

While all (almost all?) freeware offline map apps do address lookups, the
address database of Google is fantastic - so we should be able to augment
the address lookup of the offline apps with a google online lookup, when
required.

If you want, I can look with you for a good freeware offline map app for
iOS, where, at worst, we should be able to use the two-step method of:
a. Run the super accurate MIT-address-to-gps lookup online, and then,
b. Navigate offline in good iOS map freeware to those global coordinates.

Again, all (almost all?) the offline maps do address lookup - but the
database generally isn't perfect - whereas the Google DB is perfect (or
nearly so) world wide - so that's the only reason for adding the first step
(even on Android).

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 8:43:55 AM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 02:30:41 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> In fact it works fine with unexpected dropouts.

Apparently, Google Maps, at least, won't fully route wholly offline on iOS:
<https://u.cubeupload.com/islMuS.gif>

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 10:15:33 AM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 12:20:02 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> This is a screenshot of my Android map apps - *all* of which are free.
> <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5191009maps.jpg>
>
> Since I always organize my apps by categories & from best-to-worst in any
> category, one can note that the best offline roadmap routing freeware were
> found, after testing, to be:
> 1. Navigator
> 2. OSMAnd~
> 3. CoPilot GPS
> 4. Sygic
> 5. Navmii USA

I just tested the fantastically *seamless* integration of the online global
coordinate lookup being sent *directly* to the navigation apps above on
Android, where I cleared my defaults to run the test.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5217118lookup02.jpg>

Since that worked so seamlessly, the integration of global coordinates to
the offline freeware map apps should be the same or even better on iOS.

All you have to do is press the "Lookup" button to find the address, and
then the "Navigate" button to send the coordinates to either the default
offline map routing app, or, as I did above by clearing the defaults, to
any desired offline map routing app.

To that end, I looked up the five freeware programs above for iOS:
1. MapFactor GPS Navigation Maps, by MapFactor
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mapfactor-gps-navigation-maps/id1249314050>
2. OsmAnd Maps, by OsmAND B.V.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/osmand-maps/id934850257>
3. CoPilot GPS – Car Navigation, by ALK Technologies Ltd.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/copilot-gps-car-navigation/id504677517>
4. Sygic GPS Navigation & Maps, by Sygic a. s.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sygic-gps-navigation-maps/id585193266>
5. Navmii GPS USA: Offline Navigation and Traffic, by Navmii Publishing Ltd
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/navmii-gps-usa-offline-navigation-and-traffic/id405922167>

Note that the two steps are only for accuracy - as all map apps (almost
all?) will have their own address database.

Again all (almost all?) offline map apps do an address lookup for routing,
but most (almost all?) suck (IMHO) at finding specific non-business home
addresses accurately. All will get you close - but none, IMHO, match the
world-wide accuracy of a Google address lookup.

For super accuracy in non-business lookups, the two-step method should
work.
a. AddressFinder Free, by MISOOK WOO
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/addressfinder-free-zip-ip/id580052119?mt=8>
b. AddressFinder, by myice92
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/addressfinder-zipcode-lookup/id1097402595?mt=8>

I didn't test the integration of the online address finders to the offline
map apps on iOS (since I don't use the current iPad for navigation because
it has no GPS) but others should be able to test whether this same
fantastically seamless integration of an online (super accurate)
address-to-coordinate lookup to the offline map app navigation GUI works
well on iOS also.

nospam

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 12:08:49 PM8/22/18

to

In article <m8adnQBC5eqa0uDG...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne

<bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:

> >>>> I will repeat that Google Maps, on a non-GPS iOS WiFi-only iPad worked
> >>>> fine
> >>>> for both location and routing on offline Google Maps.
> >>>
> >>> location yes. routing, no.
> >>>
> >>>> I'm not sure why Apple Maps failed miserably in that same test.
> >>>
> >>> user error.
> >>
> >> No. A map program with the map loaded, location of the user and
> >> location of the destination should navigate w/o needing to contact any
> >> server. Further, they should be able to restart for any reason and
> >> continue.
> >
> > because you said so? that's not how it works.
> >
> > both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
> > internet connection. t
>
> Then they badly spec'd navigation apps. Badly designed. Badly implemented.

nonsense.

they work quite well, especially since nearly everyone has internet
access and doesn't have any problem using either of them.

many apps require internet access. this is yet another.

feel free to write your own if you think you can do a better job.

> Why I prefer (for my car) having a standalone GPS device such as a Garmin.

then use that.

> I suppose this experience buttresses the case to purchase an app that
> puts all of the map data on my smartphone for when I don't have my
> TomTom or Garmin (purchasing soon).

there are free third party options.

whether a free map app will suffice version a paid app is something
only you can decide.

> But Google and Apple should really up their game on this - your
> apologetic BS for them aside.

it's not bs.

there are a couple of billion active smartphone users who fully
understand that many apps are dependent on an internet connection.

there are third party apps that do what you want. get one (or more) of
those.

nospam

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 12:08:49 PM8/22/18

to

In article <pljlqa$gsn$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> Apparently, Google Maps, at least, won't fully route wholly offline on iOS:

nor will it on android, because routing is done server-side.

JF Mezei

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 1:44:27 PM8/22/18

to

On 2018-08-21 21:39, nospam wrote:

> both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
> internet connection. they do cache map data locally and will work
> without internet for a limited range

Do they cache map data, or do they cache images of map tiles?

Map data may allow you to choose a route. But map tiles are just
collection of pixels that have no routable information.

This is where real GPS units that have map data embeded in the unit
differentiate themselves since they do not require any data connection.

On the other hand, units with pre-loaded map data had older map data
which may not reflect currect road conditions in areas where roads
change often.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 1:44:47 PM8/22/18

to

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote

> Rod Speed wrote

>> In fact it works fine with unexpected dropouts.

> Apparently, Google Maps, at least, won't fully route wholly offline on
> iOS:

Yes, you do have to follow the route its sending you
on or return to it if you choose to deviate from it.

nospam

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 1:53:33 PM8/22/18

to

In article <_hhfD.131688$Eb4....@fx03.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
> > both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
> > internet connection. they do cache map data locally and will work
> > without internet for a limited range
>
> Do they cache map data, or do they cache images of map tiles?

map data

> Map data may allow you to choose a route. But map tiles are just
> collection of pixels that have no routable information.

nope. they're rendered based on map data.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 4:29:42 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 10:44:38 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

>>> In fact it works fine with unexpected dropouts.
>
>> Apparently, Google Maps, at least, won't fully route wholly offline on
>> iOS:
>
> Yes, you do have to follow the route its sending you
> on or return to it if you choose to deviate from it.

It's hard to make sense out of anything nospam says because he just makes
it up, leaving it to the reader to sort out the fact from fiction, but, in
this particular case, my experience mirrors the guess by nospam.

It appears that both Google Maps and Apple Maps may route (and re-route
when you go off route) on the server side.

One interesting tidbit you will notice in the screenshots below is that,
even without Internet (my current iPad has no cellular and no GPS), the
original route (which must have been done when the iPad was connected on
its own to an open WiFi access point) is grayed out as you travel in
parallel to that original route (as if to show how you could get back on
the original route).

Notice in the sequence of screenshots below the amount of gray and blue on
the original route changes, as the actual location of the vehicle
paralleled the originally intended route...

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 4:29:43 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 09:08:49 GMT, nospam wrote:

>> Apparently, Google Maps, at least, won't fully route wholly offline on iOS:
>
> nor will it on android, because routing is done server-side.

This is a good point, in that the routing, apparently, for both Apple and
Google Maps, is done on the server (if what you say is correct - where I
don't doubt it's correct but I haven't tested it - and where you've proven
umpteen times that EVERYHING you say is utterly incredibly worthless until
and unless independently tested and verified by someone with a credible
record of stating facts).

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 4:29:44 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 10:44:26 GMT, JF Mezei wrote:

> On the other hand, units with pre-loaded map data had older map data
> which may not reflect currect road conditions in areas where roads
> change often.

While roads _do_ change, I find, in practice, they don't change enough, in
general, to warrant the bother to download a new database frequently.

One map update every five or six years or so seems to work out just fine in
the Silicon Valley, IMHO (e.g., my Garmins still work reasonably well).

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 4:29:45 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 09:08:46 GMT, nospam wrote:

> nonsense.
> they work quite well, especially since nearly everyone has internet
> access and doesn't have any problem using either of them.

Google Map address and points-of-interest lookups, voice-guided turn and
street directions and accurate traffic are the best, bar none, but, Google
*sucks* offline in multiple ways (as does Apple Maps).

Hence, IMHO, you need both offline and online map apps.

> many apps require internet access. this is yet another.

Any map app that requires Internet access, no matter how good it is when it
has Internet access, will suck when there is no Internet access - where
Google Maps & Apple Maps are no exception.

> feel free to write your own if you think you can do a better job.

Or download one of the freeware offline map apps I posted prior, e.g.,
1. OsmAnd Maps, by OsmAND B.V.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/osmand-maps/id934850257>
2. MapFactor GPS Navigation Maps, by MapFactor
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mapfactor-gps-navigation-maps/id1249314050>
3. Navmii GPS USA: Offline Navigation and Traffic, by Navmii Publishing Ltd
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/navmii-gps-usa-offline-navigation-and-traffic/id405922167>
4. CoPilot GPS – Car Navigation, by ALK Technologies Ltd.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/copilot-gps-car-navigation/id504677517>
5. Sygic GPS Navigation & Maps, by Sygic a. s.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sygic-gps-navigation-maps/id585193266>

Note: I haven't tested these on iOS as I've only tested them on Android,
where they are listed above in my preference order for Android freeware.

>> Why I prefer (for my car) having a standalone GPS device such as a Garmin.
> then use that.

Most of us have at least a half dozen of these old nuvi and streetpilot
devices in our glovebox, for emergency use.

> there are free third party options.

Almost never, if ever, should you have to *purchase* any app functionality
that you need on a mobile device.

> whether a free map app will suffice version a paid app is something
> only you can decide.

I test map apps all the time, where I break them down into:
a. Online (e.g., Google Maps, Apple Maps, etc.)
b. Offline (e.g., OSMAnd~, Navigator, Navmii, etc.)

If you have plenty of fast data and cellular coverage, and if the privacy
issues don't slow you down, the online free map apps are the best, in
general, for accuracy and features (since their development is so well
funded).

However, all of the offline free map apps will get you to your destination,
where some even have decent voice turn and street name guidance.

The ones to avoid are those that...
a. don't speak turn directions
b. don't speak street names
c. have ads
etc.

>> But Google and Apple should really up their game on this - your
>> apologetic BS for them aside.
>
> it's not bs.

If Google or Apple *wanted* to work well offline, they would - but I
suspect their money doesn't come from the offline users.

That's why I keep both the online and offline map apps handy.

> there are a couple of billion active smartphone users who fully
> understand that many apps are dependent on an internet connection.

Personally, I think too many people don't protect their privacy by allowing
apps that need no Internet connection to have it; but for something like
"traffic", you kind of need that Internet connection.

> there are third party apps that do what you want. get one (or more) of
> those.

Today I tested the five apps listed above, but on Android, where they're
also availble in iOS (although many free apps are reduced functionality on
iOS in my experience, and on iOS, those same apps often have outrageous ads
- but having said that - I only tested those five apps above on Android.

Of those five, only these three freebies had acceptable features:
1. OSMAnd~
2. Navigator
3. Navmii

These two free apps basically work - but they severely lack key features:
4. CoPilot
5. Sygic

In summary, the main things lacking in the offline freeware are:
a. They lack traffic (and hence, traffic-based routing)
b. They lack super accurate address lookups (and POIs)

Some of the offline freeware
c. Contains obnoxious ads (the best freeware is totally ad free)
d. Lack voice turns or they lack voice street names

JF Mezei

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 5:09:39 PM8/22/18

to

On 2018-08-22 16:29, Arlen Holder wrote:

> One map update every five or six years or so seems to work out just fine in
> the Silicon Valley, IMHO (e.g., my Garmins still work reasonably well).

Not sure this works, but if the link below gets you to Apple Maps:

> https://maps.apple.com/?ll=45.469720,-73.601493&spn=0.012806,0.021140&t=k

Satellite imagery from 2010. Change to "maps" and you'll see massive
changes. And in many cases, the exits that were on left are now on
right and vice versa, and some exists are quite a bit before they used
to be. So your old GPS telling you that the next you need to take is 1km
ahead while you just passed the new exit location.

When you look at the structures in the satrellite view above. only 3
structures remain in operation (and one more is to be shut down in
september with the 2 remaining to be shut and demolished before end of 2018.

A major bridge across Décarie (St-jacques street) has been demolished a
few years ago, and is being rebuilt and should re-open to traffic by end
of 2018. So yes, how maps are updated matters.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 8:26:01 PM8/22/18

to

"JF Mezei" <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote in message
news:_hhfD.131688$Eb4....@fx03.iad...

> On 2018-08-21 21:39, nospam wrote:
>
>> both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
>> internet connection. they do cache map data locally and will work
>> without internet for a limited range
>
> Do they cache map data, or do they cache images of map tiles?

Google maps caches the route it has routed, that’s why
when its without the internet, you have to follow the
route and return to it if you choose to divert from it.

In other words it wont auto reroute if you leave the original
route if there is no internet and it wont announce the name
of the street or road it tells you to turn into.

> Map data may allow you to choose a route. But map tiles are
> just collection of pixels that have no routable information.

> This is where real GPS units that have map data embeded in the unit
> differentiate themselves since they do not require any data connection.

But as a consequence have no traffic info either.

It was interesting to watch google maps and what a windows phone
uses for mapping on the run into the Sydney CBD in the early peak
traffic time. Google maps kept updating the arrival time based on
traffic info and got it very right about the arrival time. The windows
phone was a long way off tens of minutes in fact and never got it right.

> On the other hand, units with pre-loaded map data
> had older map data which may not reflect currect
> road conditions in areas where roads change often.

And don’t have anything like the same quality of traffic
info that google maps gets from watching the traffic
using cellphone base pings to the traffic passing.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 8:39:18 PM8/22/18

to

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote

> Rod Speed wrote

>>>> In fact it works fine with unexpected dropouts.

>>> Apparently, Google Maps, at least, won't
>>> fully route wholly offline on iOS:

>> Yes, you do have to follow the route its sending you
>> on or return to it if you choose to deviate from it.

> It's hard to make sense out of anything nospam says because he just
> makes it up, leaving it to the reader to sort out the fact from fiction,

And deliberately is very cryptic when he claims something.

> but, in this particular case, my experience mirrors the guess by nospam.

It not a guess, but can be deliberately misleading.;

> It appears that both Google Maps and Apple Maps may route
> (and re-route when you go off route) on the server side.

Yes, I know it is. I used to pay for data by the KB so I used to
setup the route over wifi and have data turned off in the phone
and know that it would refuse to route without net access and
give up when you deviated from the route deliberately and start
directing you again when you returned to the original route.

I don’t do that anymore now that I have the phone on a $10/month
plan that gives me unlimited calls and texts and MMSs to any landline
or cellphone in the country and 1.5GB of data. I find that the 1.5GB
of data is plenty for the browsing and navigating I do when not at
home and I navigate most weeks for the garage/yard sale run.

> One interesting tidbit you will notice in the screenshots below is that,
> even without Internet (my current iPad has no cellular and no GPS),
> the original route (which must have been done when the iPad was
> connected on its own to an open WiFi access point) is grayed out
> as you travel in parallel to that original route (as if to show how
> you could get back on the original route).

I've never bothered to see what is on the screen when
navigating. I just use the turn by turn voice commands.

And I don’t have any wifi when out and
about either, so it only uses the GPS signal.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 8:43:14 PM8/22/18

to

"Arlen Holder" <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:plkh3n$t11$3...@news.mixmin.net...

We do see a lot of map updates here on the edge of town with the new
housing subdivisions and I do use that data a lot on the garage/yard
sale run.

And google maps does publish user data error reports very quickly
indeed at times. The last on I did was published in less than an hour.

Apple just ignores any reports of errors in our maps.

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 8:51:52 PM8/22/18

to

"Arlen Holder" <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote in message

news:plkh3o$t11$4...@news.mixmin.net...

> On 22 Aug 2018 09:08:46 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> nonsense.
>> they work quite well, especially since nearly everyone has internet
>> access and doesn't have any problem using either of them.
>
> Google Map address and points-of-interest lookups, voice-guided turn and
> street directions and accurate traffic are the best, bar none, but, Google
> *sucks* offline in multiple ways (as does Apple Maps).
>
> Hence, IMHO, you need both offline and online map apps.

I don’t bother with offline maps anymore. Only had the
one blackspot with no net access in years earlier this year
and that was only over mile or so inside one town.

And I have just got another sim from another carrier
that only costs me $5 a year, so even that wouldn’t
have happened if I had had that sim at that time.

And likely I wont actually use it given the fiddly
hassle of swapping sims in an iphone. Makes more
sense to just drive blind to get out of the blackspot.
I've got an excellent sense of direction so its unlikely
to waste much gasoline doing that.

>> many apps require internet access. this is yet another.

> Any map app that requires Internet access, no matter how good it is
> when it has Internet access, will suck when there is no Internet access
> - where Google Maps & Apple Maps are no exception.

No reason why it can't be set to cache the local map data so that
it can automatically carry on regardless when net access drops out.

The only real thing missing in google maps is a real time
display of the current speed limit. I do find at times that
I can't be sure what the current speed limit is.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 9:37:20 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 17:39:07 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

>> It's hard to make sense out of anything nospam says because he just
>> makes it up, leaving it to the reader to sort out the fact from fiction,
> And deliberately is very cryptic when he claims something.

I'm glad you noticed, as on the Windows groups, they are also on to him,
and he can't survive on Linux groups, but nospam seems to thrive on Apple
groups, for some strange reason.

I don't know why he survives on only Apple groups where the user base is
fundamentally a different type of person than the other platform groups.
Why Apple Apologists can only survive on Apple-only newsgroups!
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ey9kv6ysVgA>

>> but, in this particular case, my experience mirrors the guess by nospam.
> It not a guess, but can be deliberately misleading.;

I understand that you assume nospam is not guessing, but he's wrong so very
many times that there are only two logical conclusions any adult can draw:
1. He's just guessing (where his record is worse than that of the monkey)
2. Or, he's purposefully leading the poor OP astray with wrong answers.

There are no other logical reasons for his answers to be so incredible non
credible.

The problem with his almost-always-misleadingly wrong answers is that
nothing he says can ever be believed. So even when, perchance, he's right,
anyone who cares about the facts has to doublecheck everything he says.

Reading nospam is like listening to Charles Manson explain why he did it.
The story constantly changes - and never makes any logical sense.

>> It appears that both Google Maps and Apple Maps may route
>> (and re-route when you go off route) on the server side.
>
> Yes, I know it is. I used to pay for data by the KB so I used to
> setup the route over wifi and have data turned off in the phone
> and know that it would refuse to route without net access and
> give up when you deviated from the route deliberately and start
> directing you again when you returned to the original route.

Thank you for that insight, as we all went through a phase of lack of data
(my original plans had zero data) and at the same time we went through all
the phases of Google "offline" maps, which, admittedly, has changed a lot
in the past few years.

For example, I find that the Google Map downloads (i.e., the old "OK Maps"
feature) now require a login, which they didn't require (as I recall)
previously - and worse (much worse) - they actually delete themselves after
the prescribed 30 days (in the past, they used to just complain, as I
recall).

On the other hand, the tiled downloads are now a *lot* easier to perform
than they were in the past, where you used to have to guess if the
subscribed area would "fit" in whatever limits Google imposed.

In the end, the three things Google Maps does so well that I'll actually
use them are simply these:
1. Traffic
2. Lane-by-lane accuracy in both geometry & voice instructions
3. Accuracy in address lookups

For that third item, only two days ago I found a *great* way around using
Google Maps while still using the Google address lookup database (via an
MIT server), which was described earlier today here:

> I don┤ do that anymore now that I have the phone on a $10/month

> plan that gives me unlimited calls and texts and MMSs to any landline
> or cellphone in the country and 1.5GB of data. I find that the 1.5GB
> of data is plenty for the browsing and navigating I do when not at
> home and I navigate most weeks for the garage/yard sale run.

I agree with everything you said, where, I think, T-Mobile gives me about
2GB and I only use triple-digit kilobytes of data. Almost all my mapping,
for example, a lot of which is topographically based, is offline.

I give Google credit for accuracy & traffic & great directions, but, for
offline use, Google (and Apple) Maps suck (IMHO).

> I've never bothered to see what is on the screen when
> navigating. I just use the turn by turn voice commands.

Agreed. I kind of like those map routing apps that show the next turn at
the top with an arrow, distance, and name of road.

Sort of like:
(left arrow) (1 mile) (Main Street)

> And I don┤ have any wifi when out and

> about either, so it only uses the GPS signal.

Yup. Almost nobody will have WiFi when "out and about", where GPS on an
existing map works great on almost all offline maps (if not on all).

The problem for offline maps is the lookups, which, as noted, one trick is
to use the Google API to obtain that lookup sans using Google Maps.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 9:37:22 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 17:25:51 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

>> This is where real GPS units that have map data embeded in the unit
>> differentiate themselves since they do not require any data connection.
>
> But as a consequence have no traffic info either.

I'm not so sure of that. In the past, I've had GPS units that gave you a
free month or so of traffic. I found, as I recall (as it was years ago),
that they were highly inaccurate - but I'd have to dig into my memory to
tell you more.

All I'm saying is that *some* purpose-built GPS units had a traffic
receiver, as I recall.

> It was interesting to watch google maps and what a windows phone
> uses for mapping on the run into the Sydney CBD in the early peak
> traffic time. Google maps kept updating the arrival time based on
> traffic info and got it very right about the arrival time. The windows
> phone was a long way off tens of minutes in fact and never got it right.

There's no doubt Google has focused the resources on *accurate* mapping.
They just don't focus their appreciable resources on offline routing.

> And don┤ have anything like the same quality of traffic

> info that google maps gets from watching the traffic
> using cellphone base pings to the traffic passing.

I've seen even Google Maps be *very* wrong on traffic, but, in general,
Google traffic is as good as we'll ever get.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 9:37:23 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 14:09:38 GMT, JF Mezei wrote:

> Not sure this works, but if the link below gets you to Apple Maps:
>
>> https://maps.apple.com/?ll=45.469720,-73.601493&spn=0.012806,0.021140&t=k

I am very used to using old maps, where, for example, I use maps from the
late 1800s, and they _still_ get me where I need to go (USGS topographical
maps).

Obviously the road network changes faster than the topography, but,
surprisingly, many major roads in the Silican Valley exist on the 1887 maps
that I have, and some are even on the 1860's maps (which are not USGS
maps).

Most of the USGS maps I use, which all have roads and structures, are from
the 1980s, where they're just fine for the purpose of following roads.

I am not driven insane by fear that many others are, so, I don't bother to
update my Garmins's or Magellan units - and - I will repeat - they work
just fine.

I never said roads don't change. They just don't change all that much where
I happen to live, where a 10 year old map is, IMHO, just fine.

If people must have every single lane accounted for, and every single exit
accurately outlined, then I don't have anything against them updating the
maps every single day, if that's what they want to do.

I'm only responding to your comment about the drawback to the purpose-built
GPS units (e.g., the Garmin nuvi), where I posit that the maps on them,
however ancient, are "just fine" in my experience.

But I'm not driven insane by intense fear.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 10:05:28 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 17:51:42 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> I don┤ bother with offline maps anymore. Only had the

> one blackspot with no net access in years earlier this year
> and that was only over mile or so inside one town.

Everything depends on cellular coverage, or, if you can plan ahead, being
able to download the tiles, and, not going off route. :)

If you stick to the original route, or if you have good cellular coverage,
you don't need offline maps, I agree.

Still, what's the "cost" to anyone for the "insurance" of having an offline
map app (and maps, of course) just "sitting" on the phone, waiting to be
used if necessary.

> I've got an excellent sense of direction so its unlikely
> to waste much gasoline doing that.

While I too pride myself on my ability to do dead reckoning, one nice
feature of a map app is it shows "stuff" that you can't see from the road,
e.g., lakes, parks, parallel roadways, etc.

> No reason why it can't be set to cache the local map data so that
> it can automatically carry on regardless when net access drops out.

As noted, caching the map works fine ... if ... your use model fits the
map-caching use model.

If it fits, it works great.
If it doesn't fit, it sucks.

It seems that this offline Google Maps routing was covered way back in 2015
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/1rVgt7toJtM/zBL5BsDvEgAJ>
which is a conversation you had about the new features (then).

> The only real thing missing in google maps is a real time
> display of the current speed limit. I do find at times that
> I can't be sure what the current speed limit is.

That's interesting as I never noticed that missing link.

I noticed today while testing the five offline map apps I recommended
earlier that some were binging and bonging me left and right for exceeding
the speed limit.

If you want, I can go back to those apps to see which ones were annoying me
on speed limits, where I never noticed that Google Maps doesn't show that.

Thanks for bringing up that factual detail.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 22, 2018, 10:05:29 PM8/22/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 17:43:05 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> We do see a lot of map updates here on the edge of town with the new
> housing subdivisions and I do use that data a lot on the garage/yard
> sale run.
>
> And google maps does publish user data error reports very quickly
> indeed at times. The last on I did was published in less than an hour.
>
> Apple just ignores any reports of errors in our maps.

We have a thread on how quickly Google updates maps based on user input:
Google fixes errors in 1.5 months
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.ipad/WPWOPSDifJA[1-25]>

Davoud

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 12:16:06 AM8/23/18

to

nospam:

> > both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
> > internet connection. t

Alan Browne:

> Then they badly spec'd navigation apps. Badly designed. Badly implemented.

I think that they were designed primarily for urban use. Put me in Nova
Scotia and tell me to drive to L.A. I don't need no stinkin' GPS to get
there. Once I get there, however, having a GPS to get me the last mile
to the right address would be quite handy. I think that Apple or Google
maps could probably handle that. But disclaimer: I have never relied on
either map utility for GPS purposes. I have "Navigon" (Garmin), and
"TomTom US-Canada" on my iPhone. Neither requires a cellular connection
to work. However, Navigon has been discontinued (still usable) and
TomTom US-Canada is being discontinued in September. (Anyone know why?)

> Why I prefer (for my car) having a standalone GPS device such as a Garmin.

I agree. Except that I prefer built-in GPS. I've had very good
experiences with GPS in two Priuses, an Avalon, and my Lexus. I had a
so-so experience with a Subaru Forester and I used my Garmin standalone
in that vehicle. In the case of my present cars, a late-model Lexus RX
350 and a brand-new Prius, I have an iPhone app from Toyota in which I
can find and store a location. Then, when I get into the vehicle the
GPS system can read that location via Bluetooth and save it to the GPS.
Easiest and GPS programming that I have seen. If I were having
difficulty finding a location in the Lexus I could push the SOS button
and the car's built-in cell phone would put me in touch with a human in
a Lexus center who would remotely program my GPS for me. I needed this
service once and they got the obscure destination exactly right.

> I suppose this experience buttresses the case to purchase an app that
> puts all of the map data on my smartphone for when I don't have my
> TomTom or Garmin (purchasing soon).
>
> But Google and Apple should really up their game on this - your
> apologetic BS for them aside.

Bingo.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 8:28:40 AM8/23/18

to

On 22 Aug 2018 21:16:04 GMT, Davoud wrote:

> I think that they were designed primarily for urban use. Put me in Nova
> Scotia and tell me to drive to L.A. I don't need no stinkin' GPS to get
> there.

I don't know how many people have driven in Europe, particularly the
Mediterranean countries, where the country sign posts are FANTASTIC.

Each post is shaped like a vector, with only two bits of information on
each vector.
* Kilometers to
* Town name

Pretty much, in the days before maps, you could still travel hundreds of
miles across country and not "get lost" even if all you knew was the major
city you were aiming for and whether you had fuel to get there.

> Once I get there, however, having a GPS to get me the last mile
> to the right address would be quite handy.

When GPS first came out, it emboldened me to visit cities more often.

> I think that Apple or Google
> maps could probably handle that.

All maps apps can pretty much handle that nowadays.

There are essentially three categories of map apps:
1. Online free
2. Offline free
3. Offline payware

> Easiest and GPS programming that I have seen.

One "issue" I have, given the number of map apps I test, is that every app
has a different way of doing the myriad things you do with a map app, e.g.,
A. Do an address lookup
B. Route to that address lookup
C. Save a given location for future use,
etc.

Since I only use freeware, the additional problem is that no one app
generally does everything perfectly, as exemplified by Google Maps, for
example, which, online, is great, but offline, basically sucks.

Given that Google & Apple maps basically suck offline, my recommendation is
for people to have both types of maps ready and loaded.
1. Online free (Google + Apple)
2. Offline free (OSMAnd~ + Navigator + Navmii)

OsmAnd Maps, by OsmAND B.V.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/osmand-maps/id934850257>

MapFactor GPS Navigation Maps, by MapFactor
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mapfactor-gps-navigation-maps/id1249314050>

Navmii GPS USA: Offline Navigation and Traffic, by Navmii Publishing Ltd
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/navmii-gps-usa-offline-navigation-and-traffic/id405922167>

etc.

JF Mezei

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 12:01:13 PM8/23/18

to

On 2018-08-22 21:37, Arlen Holder wrote:

> I never said roads don't change. They just don't change all that much where
> I happen to live, where a 10 year old map is, IMHO, just fine.

This may be the case for you, but you MUST not generalize this because
elsewhere things change.

Montréal is rebuilding a major highway interchange and roads leading to
it. If you were to use a year old map on GPS and based your driving on
what the GPS tells you, you wouldn't get there. Roads have been moved,
temporary exits and temporary ramps created to allow for old ones to be
demolished and new permanent one built.

Every weekend, closures are different depending on what ramps/areas need
to be clear of traffic as they demolish old structures above or connect
new roadway or temporary ramps/exits.

If you are a tourist who assumes your old maps are fine because they are
fine back home, you're in for a surprise because by the time your GPS
tells you to turn left, you've already missed the temporary exit that
was a kilometre before and more importantly, by the time the GPS tells
you to turn left, the road below you no longer exists.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 12:28:48 PM8/23/18

to

On 23 Aug 2018 09:01:11 GMT, JF Mezei wrote:

> This may be the case for you, but you MUST not generalize this because
> elsewhere things change.

While I never once said or intimated that roads don't change, they really
don't change all that fast either, where, of course, they "can" change a
lot if, say, there's another 1,000 bomber bombing campaign such as those
that rearranged the streets of Dresden, Swinoujscie, Hamburg, Pforzheim
Berlin, Kassel, Darmstadt, etc.

When my Garmin and Magellan purpose-built GPS units were new and a couple
of years old, I never felt any need to update the maps, even then.

A lot of people are driven by fear however - hence they try to update
everything - which is fine - as long as their fear is rational.

> Montréal is rebuilding a major highway interchange and roads leading to
> it. If you were to use a year old map on GPS and based your driving on
> what the GPS tells you, you wouldn't get there. Roads have been moved,
> temporary exits and temporary ramps created to allow for old ones to be
> demolished and new permanent one built.

Yes. You should see the airports in the Silicon Valley, where every month,
it seemed, both SFO and SJC were completely different.

Funny thing though ... someone invented this little thing called a "sign".

Hence, with those things, called "signs", you can _still_ get to where you
need to go, even if the GPS is inaccurate.

> Every weekend, closures are different depending on what ramps/areas need
> to be clear of traffic as they demolish old structures above or connect
> new roadway or temporary ramps/exits.

See above. I think San Jose Airport and San Francisco Aiport each went
through a building phase in the last ten years that will rival any you've
seen where you are.

As an example, at SJC, we used to habitually enter and exit by walking up a
ramp placed at the plan on the tarmac, where, now, we have modern "jetways"
for most flights.

> If you are a tourist who assumes your old maps are fine because they are
> fine back home, you're in for a surprise because by the time your GPS
> tells you to turn left, you've already missed the temporary exit that
> was a kilometre before and more importantly, by the time the GPS tells
> you to turn left, the road below you no longer exists.

Again, I'm not saying roads don't change.
I'm only saying that the old Garmin units seem to work just fine for me.

JF Mezei

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 2:05:47 PM8/23/18

to

On 2018-08-23 12:28, Arlen Holder wrote:

> Funny thing though ... someone invented this little thing called a "sign".

The problem is that many have come to rely on their GPS. If the GPS says
that the next exit is 2 miles away, they tend to not put much attention
to road signs until then. (and they therefore miss the exit that has
been moved up by a mile).

Similarly, GPS may tell you to use the right lane for the next exit when
the exit you want is now on the left.

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:19:16 PM8/23/18

to

On 2018-08-22 12:08, nospam wrote:
> In article <m8adnQBC5eqa0uDG...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> I will repeat that Google Maps, on a non-GPS iOS WiFi-only iPad worked
>>>>>> fine
>>>>>> for both location and routing on offline Google Maps.
>>>>>
>>>>> location yes. routing, no.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure why Apple Maps failed miserably in that same test.
>>>>>
>>>>> user error.
>>>>
>>>> No. A map program with the map loaded, location of the user and
>>>> location of the destination should navigate w/o needing to contact any
>>>> server. Further, they should be able to restart for any reason and
>>>> continue.
>>>
>>> because you said so? that's not how it works.
>>>
>>> both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
>>> internet connection. t
>>
>> Then they badly spec'd navigation apps. Badly designed. Badly implemented.
>
> nonsense.
>
> they work quite well, especially since nearly everyone has internet
> access and doesn't have any problem using either of them.
>
> many apps require internet access. this is yet another.

Navigation apps should never depend on cell tower access. That's just
complete idiocy.

--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:25:06 PM8/23/18

to

On 2018-08-23 00:16, Davoud wrote:
> nospam:
>>> both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
>>> internet connection. t
>
> Alan Browne:
>> Then they badly spec'd navigation apps. Badly designed. Badly implemented.
>
> I think that they were designed primarily for urban use. Put me in Nova

Urban shmurban. They should work anywhere on the continent that people
use roads on a regular basis. I can understand a map not having a
particular road on it - and it's up to me to verify. But once the map
is in memory and GPS is available, then there should be 0 need for
internet access - nor for that matter cell tower access.

> Scotia and tell me to drive to L.A. I don't need no stinkin' GPS to get
> there. Once I get there, however, having a GPS to get me the last mile

Depends on the user - my SO and I, on long drives, often take backroads
for long sections to explore and enjoy.

And even on an Interstate odessy, nice to have the data on distances and
time and so on, not to mention gas stations, restaurants and hotel/motels.

> to the right address would be quite handy. I think that Apple or Google
> maps could probably handle that. But disclaimer: I have never relied on
> either map utility for GPS purposes. I have "Navigon" (Garmin), and
> "TomTom US-Canada" on my iPhone. Neither requires a cellular connection
> to work. However, Navigon has been discontinued (still usable) and
> TomTom US-Canada is being discontinued in September. (Anyone know why?)

Low sales?

>
>> Why I prefer (for my car) having a standalone GPS device such as a Garmin.
>
> I agree. Except that I prefer built-in GPS. I've had very good
> experiences with GPS in two Priuses, an Avalon, and my Lexus. I had a
> so-so experience with a Subaru Forester and I used my Garmin standalone

I've found the in-car (OEM) systems to have pretty poor UI's and many
restrictions that are a PITA. I've been looking at new cars and some
have much better systems now.

> in that vehicle. In the case of my present cars, a late-model Lexus RX
> 350 and a brand-new Prius, I have an iPhone app from Toyota in which I
> can find and store a location. Then, when I get into the vehicle the
> GPS system can read that location via Bluetooth and save it to the GPS.
> Easiest and GPS programming that I have seen. If I were having
> difficulty finding a location in the Lexus I could push the SOS button
> and the car's built-in cell phone would put me in touch with a human in
> a Lexus center who would remotely program my GPS for me. I needed this
> service once and they got the obscure destination exactly right.

I despise that sort of reliance (not to mention the fees).

>
>> I suppose this experience buttresses the case to purchase an app that
>> puts all of the map data on my smartphone for when I don't have my
>> TomTom or Garmin (purchasing soon).
>>
>> But Google and Apple should really up their game on this - your
>> apologetic BS for them aside.
>
> Bingo.

--

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:25:48 PM8/23/18

to

Then no excuse not to resume navigation w/o needing access to a cell
tower/internet.

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:27:00 PM8/23/18

to

On 2018-08-21 22:06, badgolferman wrote:

> Google Maps has offline maps for any area you want to download. check
> out the settings for that.

Indeed - I have done that - but I haven't tested the case where you quit
navigating a route and then want to resume it. I'm in no hurry to test
it either...

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:49:40 PM8/23/18

to

I fully agree with you as facts are facts which all adults agree on.

My main point was that the older maps on the Garmins are "good enough" but
I never said they were perfect.

Truth be told, I don't remember the Garmins being all that explicit about
which lane to get into. I think that's a relatively new occurrence that
Google is pioneering, where they'll tell me the exact one, two, or three
lanes to get into to make my next turn.

Obviously in the USA, the Interstates have always said which lane to get
into in order to make a turn (where they change the striping to indicate
that a turn is coming up or that you can't get out of the lane you're in).

So, I think it's still a fact that "signs" will still get you to where you
need to go, but I certainly agree with you that people may be confused when
the Garmin tells them to take the next exit and then they find that the
next exit no longer exists.

However ... on the topic of signs ... in the USA anyway .... they generally
don't "open" a new road without first putting up the correct signage first.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:49:41 PM8/23/18

to

On 23 Aug 2018 12:19:11 GMT, Alan Browne wrote:

>> they work quite well, especially since nearly everyone has internet
>> access and doesn't have any problem using either of them.
>>
>> many apps require internet access. this is yet another.
>
>
> Navigation apps should never depend on cell tower access. That's just
> complete idiocy.

In nospam's make-believe world, things are different than from the rest of
us in the real world.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 3:55:05 PM8/23/18

to

On 23 Aug 2018 12:26:54 GMT, Alan Browne wrote:

> Indeed - I have done that - but I haven't tested the case where you quit
> navigating a route and then want to resume it. I'm in no hurry to test
> it either...

I think it's pretty clear (although I can be convinced otherwise if someone
provides facts) that Google Maps does its routing on the Google servers,
so, if you're not connected to Google Servers, the route might stay on the
map (like it does below) but it won't change if you go off course (see
example below).
<http://i.cubeupload.com/3J1768.gif>

Interestingly, it does change the level of gray and blue though...

John Angus

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 4:51:06 PM8/23/18

to

"Davoud" <st...@sky.net> wrote in message
news:230820180016049385%st...@sky.net...

> nospam:
>> > both apple maps and google maps are designed to be used with an active
>> > internet connection. t
>
> Alan Browne:
>> Then they badly spec'd navigation apps. Badly designed. Badly
>> implemented.
>
> I think that they were designed primarily for urban use. Put me in Nova
> Scotia and tell me to drive to L.A. I don't need no stinkin' GPS to get
> there. Once I get there, however, having a GPS to get me the last mile
> to the right address would be quite handy. I think that Apple or Google
> maps could probably handle that. But disclaimer: I have never relied on
> either map utility for GPS purposes. I have "Navigon" (Garmin), and
> "TomTom US-Canada" on my iPhone. Neither requires a cellular connection
> to work. However, Navigon has been discontinued (still usable) and
> TomTom US-Canada is being discontinued in September. (Anyone know why?)

Likely because not enough are silly enough to pay for it now.

John McWilliams

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 4:57:03 PM8/23/18

to

No real surprise if you leave the app the data gets dropped.

Several years ago I loaded the city I wanted in my phone (might have
been Tranna! Or Montréal!*) long before I got there, but kept Maps
active. Worked fine. Also discovered that if I tried to change
resolution and go back, that also screwed the pooch.

It was somewhere in Canada, as I wanted to avoid extortionate roaming
fees at the time.

--

I know that you believe you understood what you think I said, but I'm
not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 5:16:33 PM8/23/18

to

On 23 Aug 2018 13:57:01 GMT, John McWilliams wrote:

> It was somewhere in Canada, as I wanted to avoid extortionate roaming
> fees at the time.

Understood.
It takes intelligence to avoid being raped by the carriers.
I agree.

Luckily, at least in the USA nowadays, T-Mobile has changed a lot of how
the business works, IMHO.

I first had Verizon, but dropped them the moment the 2-year contract ran
out because they upped my contract when a phone broke under their repair
plan that they then replaced for free. I told them the moment that contract
expired (two years later, of course), I'd drop them - and I did.

I was happy on AT&T - but the company was paying my bills (so price didn't
matter - but AT&T was cheaper than Verizon at that time anyway - so the
company won by my decision to drop Verizon).

Then, I left that company and had to pay my own phone and Internet bills
for the first time in my life. I was on the Blackberry plan which they
grand fathered for blocking data when I put another phone on it, but then
they changed their rules and said that any other "smart" phone, even with a
data block, would have to have data whether I liked it or not.

After complaining to the FCC and getting a call from an AT&T VP who said,
much like nospam does, the most idiotic things that I had to wonder if she
really was _that_ incredibly stupid or if she was just simply being
duplicitous.

She kept the broken record on that nobody would ever want "just" cellular
sans "data" on a smart phone. Seriously. She said, incredulously, "What
good is a smart phone without a data plan?".

I had to shake my head, just like I do whenever nospam posts, asking:
a. Is she so incredibly stupid that she actually believes what she says?
b. Or is she simply being duplicitous?

Anyway, I got a letter back from the FCC telling me that AT&T told them
that we "resolved the issue", which, is funny, because I dropped AT&T the
moment the contract ran our, and never looked back.

I went to T-Mobile, who, at that time, didn't care that I wanted only
cellular. The problem at that time with T-Mobile was that SMS was only 200
texts a month, which would last me about a year in those days, but the kids
--- oh the kids ... they text like there's no tomorrow. They hated the 200
limit. They also hated that the iPhone wasn't on T-Mobile at that time.

So, to your point that we had to be smarter in the olden days, I learned
how to jailbreak the AT&T iPhone so that it would accept T-Mobile and I
learned how to use maps offline so that they used no data.

Nowadays, everything is pretty easy in that... at least for T-Mobile...
a. I have unlimited calls
b. I have unlimited texts
c. I have more data than I can use
d. In Europe, the data is unlimited (strangely enough)
e. There are no roaming charges (in the USA or in Europe)
f. Tethering and hotspotting are free in the USA (dunno about Europe)
g. WiFi calling is free in the USA and in Europe
h. Calls are 20 cents per minute otherwise when in Europe
i. I can pay a one-time fee for more data (if I ever need it)
j. They have no contract
k. They give interest-free phone loans (at about $50 more than the market)
l. Service, for me, is "about the same" as was Verizon & AT&T (sequential)
m. Customer support is ok (it's about the same as Verizon & AT&T was)
n. They give me free everything
- Free sim cards any time I want them (and I have a lot!)
- Free 200MB/month SIMs for my iPads (grandfathered for life)
- Free femtocell inside my house
- Free cellular repeater inside my house
etc.

Davoud

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 7:21:04 PM8/23/18

to

Alan Browne:

> >> Why I prefer (for my car) having a standalone GPS device such as a Garmin.

Davoud:

> > I agree. Except that I prefer built-in GPS. I've had very good
> > experiences with GPS in two Priuses, an Avalon, and my Lexus. I had a
> > so-so experience with a Subaru Forester and I used my Garmin standalone

Alan Browne:

> I've found the in-car (OEM) systems to have pretty poor UI's and many
> restrictions that are a PITA. I've been looking at new cars and some
> have much better systems now.

You're a hard man to please. Much more discriminating than I, a humble
Appalachian coal miner, am. I'm trying to think of what restrictions
apply to my two built-in GPS units and I can't come up with any. They
just work.

> > in that vehicle. In the case of my present cars, a late-model Lexus RX
> > 350 and a brand-new Prius, I have an iPhone app from Toyota in which I
> > can find and store a location. Then, when I get into the vehicle the
> > GPS system can read that location via Bluetooth and save it to the GPS.
> > Easiest and GPS programming that I have seen. If I were having
> > difficulty finding a location in the Lexus I could push the SOS button
> > and the car's built-in cell phone would put me in touch with a human in
> > a Lexus center who would remotely program my GPS for me. I needed this
> > service once and they got the obscure destination exactly right.

> I despise that sort of reliance (not to mention the fees).

These systems are a form of insurance, useful in case of accident or
other emergency. The Lexus is one of the world's most reliable
automobiles, but what if it did break down for some reason? A touch of
the SOS button gets me a tow and a loaner Lexus brought to my position
so that I can resume my trip. To me the fee is trivial; I understand
why some would find it onerous. Choice is good.

I subscribe to Adobe Creative Cloud (full) and to the Photography Plan.
I pay for a second Photography Plan for my early-teens nephew. Three
subscriptions. The very idea of paying a paltry sum each month to use a
full suite of world-class graphics and publishing software drives some
people nuts逆hey despise the idea. Yet they pay monthly mortgages,
rent, utilities, car payments, newspaper and magazine subscriptions and
whatnot, and fail to see the parallel.

I'm not sure that I understand what it is about reliance that you
despise. Do you know how many individuals and public and private
entities you are relying upon when you drive an automobile, with or
without a GPS active? And how many additional ones you add when you
switch on a GPS of any kind? Everyone from thousands of people at NASA
and its contractors, ESA and other national space agencies, to the
cartographers to the myriad component manufacturers and the thousands
of programmers, factory workers, sales and support personnel, shippers,
and on and on.

So calling for help programming a point that was not on Google or Apple
Maps (I had Internet access) once in 19 years of GPS usage does not
seem to me to indicate excessive reliance. But, as I have already
conceded, your standards are way above mine.

Davoud

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 7:54:06 PM8/23/18

to

Davoud:

> > However, Navigon has been discontinued (still usable) and
> > TomTom US-Canada is being discontinued in September. (Anyone know why?)

John Angus:

> Likely because not enough are silly enough to pay for it now.

I'm sorry, but I didn't get a good look at your credentials. What
qualifies you to judge how I choose to spend my money? Beyond the
obvious smug self-righteousness, I mean.

BTW, the real answer to my question is "New apps."

Rod Speed

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 10:39:46 PM8/23/18

to

"Arlen Holder" <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote in message

news:pln87g$8sd$1...@news.mixmin.net...

How much are you paying for that now ?

John Angus

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 10:43:30 PM8/23/18

to

"Davoud" <st...@sky.net> wrote in message

news:230820181954041251%st...@sky.net...

> Davoud:
>> > However, Navigon has been discontinued (still usable) and
>> > TomTom US-Canada is being discontinued in September. (Anyone know why?)
>
> John Angus:
>> Likely because not enough are silly enough to pay for it now.
>
> I'm sorry, but I didn't get a good look at your credentials.

Because you have wanked yourself completely blind, as always.

> What qualifies you to judge how I choose to spend my money?

Never ever did anything even remotely like that.

> BTW, the real answer to my question is "New apps."

Nope, the wealth of free ones is the real answer.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 11:21:31 PM8/23/18

to

On 23 Aug 2018 19:39:35 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> How much are you paying for that now ?

I'm grandfathered in an older plan that doesn't exist anymore (AFAIK) and I
have _lots_ (and lots) of phones on my plan (some of which T-Mobile gives
me for free) as I give both the plan and the phones as gifts every year to
relatives (it's my shtick as I buy all the mobile devices in our family).

However, what matters is what someone can get now, as a new client.
If we google for current "t-mobile family plan", we get:
<https://duckduckgo.com/html?q=t-mobile%20family%20plan>

First hit is this - so let's see what it says:
<https://www.t-mobile.com/offers/family-plan-savings-with-company-phone>
"Your first family line is $55/mo. with AutoPay."
"Your second line is $35/mo. with AutoPay."

Suffice to say I'm paying far (far) less than that, for the first two
phones - but this URL says "company" even as the web page doesn't mention
the word "company" so it's confusing.

If we go to the T-Mobile main page:
<https://prepaid.t-mobile.com/marketing-module/prepaid_home_page.html>

And if we click on "Family plans" ... Jesus Christ ... they throw up all
sorts of MARKETING shit ... I just want the plan for a "family" which we'll
define, for now, as 4 phones for God's sake.

Let's try here...
<https://support.t-mobile.com/community/plans-services>

Yikes. There are so many with such MARKETING names.... let's pick this one:
<https://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-37876>

Christ. There's no price.

Anyway, suffice to say it's about 20 per month per phone (but it's not that
simple because some lines are more expensive than others).

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 23, 2018, 11:39:57 PM8/23/18

to

On 24 Aug 2018 03:21:31 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> Anyway, suffice to say it's about 20 per month per phone (but it's not that
> simple because some lines are more expensive than others).

BTW, for years, it averaged less than $15/month/phone but travel in Europe
was $2/minute, so I switched it (regretfully) to the current plan which
upped all the phones to a bit less than $20/month on average to get the 20
cents per minute calls in Europe.

I'm not sure if that was worth the switch but they won't let me go back to
the original plan so I'm stuck with this 1/3rd more expensive
$20/month/phone plan on average.

Lewis

unread,

Aug 24, 2018, 1:34:46 AM8/24/18

to

In message <WKydnYN6LdDjl-LG...@giganews.com> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2018-08-21 22:06, badgolferman wrote:

>> Google Maps has offline maps for any area you want to download. check
>> out the settings for that.

> Indeed - I have done that - but I haven't tested the case where you quit
> navigating a route and then want to resume it. I'm in no hurry to test
> it either...

As long as you refresh the google maps every 30 days, the offline maps
make the App function like a stand-alone GPS unit, including routing new
trips without any network access.

--
I AM SO VERY TIRED Bart chalkboard Ep. AABF20

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 24, 2018, 8:48:11 AM8/24/18

to

On 24 Aug 2018 05:34:45 GMT, Lewis wrote:

>> Indeed - I have done that - but I haven't tested the case where you quit
>> navigating a route and then want to resume it. I'm in no hurry to test
>> it either...
>
> As long as you refresh the google maps every 30 days, the offline maps
> make the App function like a stand-alone GPS unit, including routing new
> trips without any network access.

Ummm... Lewis ... speak to your fellow Apple Apologist nospam please.

While it's unclear which "map" app you're talking about, if we assume
you're talking about either Apple Maps or Google Maps, then your Apple
Apologist buddy nospam directly refuted your claim.

Both you Apple Appologists can't guess right since their different guesses.

He guessed that both Apple Maps & Google Maps route on the *server*.
You guessed that (some) map app routes on the local device.

You can't both have guessed right.
Hence, either the Apple Apologist' guess by nospam is right.
Or, the Apple Apologist guess by Lewis is right.

Personally, since I tested this with Gmail Maps on an iPad sans cellular, I
will have to defer to nospam's guess (which I verified since you can't ever
trust any guess from you classic Apple Apologists).

Lewis: Back up your guess - or please shut up because your guesses are
always wrong.

*(Sheesh. It's hard to believe some people are really _that_ stupid!*

Alan Browne

unread,

Aug 24, 2018, 1:54:01 PM8/24/18

to

I know that, but didn't do that for the day trip mentioned - didn't even
think to.

Zaidy036

unread,

Aug 24, 2018, 5:34:14 PM8/24/18

to

Look at Consumer Cellular <https://www.consumercellular.com/Plans> and
if you are a member of AARP you get a 5% discount. They use AT&T and
T-Mobile as a choice if you remember to specify what you want. But no
service in Europe.

--
Zaidy036

Arlen Holder

unread,

Aug 24, 2018, 7:05:18 PM8/24/18

to

On 24 Aug 2018 10:53:55 GMT, Alan Browne wrote:

>> As long as you refresh the google maps every 30 days, the offline maps
>> make the App function like a stand-alone GPS unit, including routing new
>> trips without any network access.
>
> I know that, but didn't do that for the day trip mentioned - didn't even
> think to.

Hi Alan Browne,
I'm not sure you undestood Lewis, as it seems the offline maps *never*
route, at least in my tests of Google Maps, if you're offline.

They'll route fine if you're online - but - according to nospam's guess
(which my tests do concur with), the routing is on the Google server.

If that is the case, then it's *impossible* for what you said you know to
be true and it's impossible for what Lewis said to be correct.

This is just an FYI so that you're not led astray by Lewis' guesses.