Re: Why do google offline maps expire every n? days?

[Roy Tremblay]

Chris in Makati <ma...@nospam.com> actually wrote:

>>> No. They expire 29 days after the time you update them. So if you
>>> update them at 6pm they expire at 6pm 29 days later. That's 29 days.
>>>
>>> Only you could twist 29 days into meaning 30 days.
>>
>>There is something odd about nospam in that he loves to argue where he just
>>makes up what he wants to argue about.
>
> It's funny to watch when he boxes himself into a corner. He'll argue
> that black is white rather than admit he was mistaken about something.

I agree.

That's the interesting thing about people like nospam, who have more than
one psychological trait that causes them to twist in the wind when they
jump to erroneous conclusions and then force themselves to declare that 29
is 30 and that 30 is 30.

As I referenced with a URL already, I tested the iOS and Android map
caching feature rather thoroughly 3 years ago when I first found out about
it. I just thought it was odd that iOS was 29 days while Android was 30.

Then, nospam said it's 30 for both in this thread, where I thanked him in
my response, because my last extensive tests had been three years old (and
I admitted that openly).

Then you kindly tested it, and found that nothing seems to have changed in
the 3 years since I last tested it, where I thanked you for that
confirmation. Had it been 30 days for both iOS and Android, I still would
have thanked you for that confirmation.

You see, to people like you and me, a fact is just that. It's a fact.
If it's 29, then it's 29. If it's 30, then it's 30.
It's just a fact.

But to people like nospam, it's an emotion.

[Roy Tremblay]

Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid> actually wrote:

>> No. They expire 29 days after the time you update them. So if you
>> update them at 6pm they expire at 6pm 29 days later. That's 29 days.
>>
>> Only you could twist 29 days into meaning 30 days.
>

> nospam probably was (is?) a travel agent who sells "8-day" holidays,
> which are actually a little over 6 days.

I find people like nospam interesting from a psychological standpoint,
since they seem to prey on the gullible.

In any ng outside the iOS newsgroups, he consistently gets his head handed
to him by logical people, so, he's just used to a far more gullible crowd
than the average Linux or Android users are.

What's immensely interesting is that he seems to be insisting that 29 days
is 30 days for iOS, but not that 30 days is 31 days for Android, so, his
ideas don't even follow through logically.

The sad thing is that there are *many* people like nospam, who are so
illogical in their thought processes, that it makes me sad to think that
they are allowed to vote (since these purely emotional people seem to
outnumber us logical thinkers).

To nospam, he'll just make up anything to back up his emotions.
It works perfectly for him on the iOS newsgroups.
Yet other newsgroups (e.g., Linux & Android & Photography) hand him his
head (rightly so).

I find it interesting how he can thrive on the iOS newsgroups, and yet,
nowhere else (AFAICT) are the general clientele as naive & gullible.

[Erilar]

They expire? What kind of maps? Besides, google's maps are not
particularly accurate in thinly-populated areas like mine. Apple's maps are
better.
>



--
biblioholic medievalist via iPad

[Roy Tremblay]

Roy Tremblay <rmbla...@nlnet.nl> actually wrote:

> Here's a cut and paste of my test, but the net is that the contour feature
> of OSMAnd~ version 2.5.4 (and the latest version of 2.5.6) is completely
> and legitimately free.
>
> You just have to know what you're doing, that's all.
> Which was always my main point about freeware.

I just tested the free contour map feature with the latest version of
OSMAnd~ freeware (version 2.6.2) and it works just fine to show contour
lines and hillside shading legitimately for free.

While I've always said that any fool or lazy person can pay for
functionality that they could have gotten for free, I thank Carlos E.R. for
pointing this technicality out and I do not intimate that he is a fool or
that he is lazy.

I am just saying that it takes effort and intelligence to find the freeware
solution where to find a payware solution takes neither.

The "cost" of freeware is in the intelligence required and the effort
expended to find and learn to use the best out there.

If you're in the USA, then this OSMAnd~ solution is NOT the best way to
obtain accurate offline contour maps - but if you're outside the USA, this
open source F-Droid OSMAnd~ solution might be the best way available to
you.

[Roy Tremblay]

Erilar <dra...@chibardun.netinvalid> actually wrote:

> They expire? What kind of maps? Besides, google's maps are not
> particularly accurate in thinly-populated areas like mine. Apple's maps are
> better.

Hi Erilar,

What we're talking about is the fact that you can zoom into any area of
Google Maps while online and then type into the Google Map search bar the
two words "ok maps", and Google Maps will walk you through the process of
"saving" that map tile for offline use into your "map cache".

There are good reasons for saving map tiles for offline use, but one
technicality is that Google nags you to update them every month. (It's a
long story on the Android newsgroup, where nospam insists they expire in 30
days on both iOS and on Android but let's ignore that technicality for
now.)

Point is that you can set the Google Maps to automatically update those
cached offline map tiles when you're on WiFi, so, in reality, it's a moot
point if you have your settings intelligently set as to how often the
offline cached map tiles need to be updated.

The main reasons for wanting offline map tiles is that you can't always
rely on cellular signal, and, in some cases (e.g., in my case where I only
have the free 200MB/month T-Mobile data plan on my iPads) you want to be
intelligent about using your cellular data only when it's actually needed.

Hope that helps answer your question.

If not, feel free to ask as we have a nicely detailed thread on the Android
newsgoup on how to intelligently use freeware for all your mapping needs.

[dorayme]

In article <olgkd4$91d$2...@dont-email.me>,

Erilar <dra...@chibardun.netinvalid> wrote:

> They expire? What kind of maps?

You can save a map area (up to a certain file size, so as not to
overwhelm your storage capacity for one reason) for use when you are
offline. Whatever Google's reason for expiring, it can be useful for
the user too, freeing up your storage space if you forget to delete it
later. Good if you are tripping about in a strange country and need
them for a very few weeks.

--
dorayme

[Roy Tremblay]

dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:

> You can save a map area (up to a certain file size, so as not to
> overwhelm your storage capacity for one reason) for use when you are
> offline. Whatever Google's reason for expiring, it can be useful for
> the user too, freeing up your storage space if you forget to delete it
> later. Good if you are tripping about in a strange country and need
> them for a very few weeks.

I don't use the Google Map offline cache all that often (since better
alternatives exist) but are you sure the expire means "delete"?

I was under the impression that the expiry date effectively means that
Google just nags you to death - but not that the maps are "deleted".

Google just wants you to "update" them, was what I had thought.
Are you sure they're auto deleted? (I didn't think they were ever deleted
but I haven't tested this extensively in 3 years so they could have changed
their methods.)

[dorayme]

In article <oli67m$v3s$3...@gioia.aioe.org>,
Roy Tremblay <rmbla...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

...

> I was under the impression that the expiry date effectively means that
> Google just nags you to death - but not that the maps are "deleted".
>
> Google just wants you to "update" them, was what I had thought.
> Are you sure they're auto deleted? (I didn't think they were ever deleted
> but I haven't tested this extensively in 3 years so they could have changed
> their methods.)

This is the official G:

<https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6291838?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform
=iOS>

--
dorayme

[Roy Tremblay]

dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:

> This is the official G:
>
> <https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6291838?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform
> =iOS>

Thanks for citing that page on the offline Google Maps.
https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6291838

Everything is in the details, where the "saving" was as I had originally
stated, which is that the ability to save offline map tiles doesn't save
any memory space (in fact, it uses up memory space).

There is no indication that I know of that the automatic nag after about a
month to "update" the cached map tiles actually ever "deletes" them.

I did find at least one incorrect statement in that Google help page
though, which is that it implies you need to "sign in" to Google Maps, but
I never sign in (I don't even have a Google account for that, nor is Google
Play on my Android phone) and I can still save offline map tiles easily.

I just checked by turning off my WiFi and my cellular data and then opening
Google Maps after having saved a map tile. The map tile displayed fine,
until I scrolled to its edge where the area outside the previously cached
map tile abruptly stopped displaying clearly.

One caveat on my test results are that I never update an app unless I know
there's something I want in the update, so I'm still on a version of the
Google Map app that has to be a few years old. Checking the version, it
appears to be
Google Maps: Hamburger > Settings > About, terms & privacy >
Google Maps Version 7.0.2 (c) 2013 Google Inc

[dorayme]

In article <olj91r$n5j$1...@gioia.aioe.org>,

Roy Tremblay <rmbla...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:
>
> > This is the official G:
> >
> > <https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6291838?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform
> > =iOS>
>
> Thanks for citing that page on the offline Google Maps.
> https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6291838
>
> Everything is in the details, where the "saving" was as I had originally
> stated, which is that the ability to save offline map tiles doesn't save
> any memory space (in fact, it uses up memory space).
>

Yes, of course, saving offline map areas to your tablet must take up
storage space (just like any cached item).

> There is no indication that I know of that the automatic nag after about a
> month to "update" the cached map tiles actually ever "deletes" them.

It is true that words to the effect it deletes stored maps is hard to
find, I did read that it reminds after 15 days and "expires" after 30.
Let's make an experiment then with the latest GMaps, save a map and
wait a month to see what happens. An example of having to go back to
the days of the horse and buggy and find out an old fashioned way. <g>

Considering that it G allows you to save to an SD, it does not sound
as if they are interested in deletions at a distance. Perhaps
expiration just means that you can still use the expired map but if
you go over a cliff because the road system has been since changed and
reflected in an updated map, survivors or loved ones cannot get
compensation from G. Best not to experiment on this one.

--
dorayme

[Roy Tremblay]

dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:

> Yes, of course, saving offline map areas to your tablet must take up
> storage space (just like any cached item).

We agree.

>> There is no indication that I know of that the automatic nag after about a
>> month to "update" the cached map tiles actually ever "deletes" them.
>
> It is true that words to the effect it deletes stored maps is hard to
> find, I did read that it reminds after 15 days and "expires" after 30.

I agree with you that Google makes it supremely unclear what happens if you
ignore their nag to update after "n" days.

Given that I don't update mine, I think they last forever.
And so does Google's nag to update them. :)

My Google Map app is circa 2013, for example, so I should check if long-ago
downloaded map tiles still are there.

> Let's make an experiment then with the latest GMaps, save a map and
> wait a month to see what happens. An example of having to go back to
> the days of the horse and buggy and find out an old fashioned way. <g>

Personally, I find Google Maps only useful for its free traffic, so, I only
use "ok maps" to test things for the team, which I tested extensively and
reported upon years ago for both the iOS and Android newsgroups.

The key problem with Google Maps is that they essentially don't work well
offline, and anyone who relies on always being online is, in a word, a
fool.

The offline free map programs work as well and have as accurate maps, if
you know what you're doing (where, as always, the intelligence and effort
to find the good ones is the true cost of freeware).

I realize most people aren't intelligent enough to find good alternatives
to Google Maps that work far better and just as accurately offline.

While I'm far smarter than the vast majority of posters here, even I'm not
intelligent enough to find a free offline traffic-reporting app that works
better than Google Maps does online! :)

> Considering that it G allows you to save to an SD, it does not sound
> as if they are interested in deletions at a distance.

I agree with you.
I suspect that, if I look, I'll find the cached map tiles of my long-ago
downloaded Google Maps, still on my SD card.

NOTE: I habitually factory reset my phone about once a month and I rotate
SD cards, so it would be an effort to look for those long-ago cached map
tiles).

> Perhaps
> expiration just means that you can still use the expired map but if
> you go over a cliff because the road system has been since changed and
> reflected in an updated map, survivors or loved ones cannot get
> compensation from G. Best not to experiment on this one.

That's a good point!
Your supposition makes sense, in that it's likely to both you and to me
that Google doesn't actually "delete" the cached map tiles, but, that if
you relied on them, and then sued them for damages, they could say "well, I
told you that they had expired".

Makes sense to me, where I appreciate that you added value to the
conversation, and hence to our combined tribal knowledge.

In summary, it's likely that Google Maps will nag you to death to update
your cached map tiles, but that you can ignore that nag (and nothing
happens), or, better yet, in a newer version of Google Maps than I have
(mine is circa 2013), you can just turn on the automatic Wi-Fi update
feature (which may require logging into a Google account, which I don't
normally do).

So the only unanswered related question seems to be what value does logging
into a Google Account get you with respect to using offline cached map
tiles?

[dorayme]

In article <olkrgd$ugi$1...@gioia.aioe.org>,

Roy Tremblay <rmbla...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> The key problem with Google Maps is that they essentially don't work well
> offline,

Not noticed this on my Pad? Offline saved maps seem to have worked
well for me. That is, when I come to look at an area (a week later
even) when I finally arrive there and I am not on the internet, the
details of the area are there.

There are two possibilities in my mind about this business of seeing
offline detail. One is that the consciously saved map stays in the
solid state memory of the iPad, written to file as it were. The other
is that there is caching when being online and the cached stays
awhile. I am unsure about the distinction between these two things. I
could make sense of it if caching is something that lasts a very
little time (as when you are on a website and a repeated image over
many pages is *not* downloaded many times) whereas conscious saving is
much more permanent.

Truth is, my tablet is more obscure to me than my desktops, the latter
having clear RAM and hard disks and I can make better mental pictures
of what is happening.

I am going to be very frank with you, I am a bit frightened of my iPad
and approach it very politely every day. My reward has been - so far -
that it has been very nice to me and seems to appreciate that I don't
do what I love doing with most things, getting my toolbox and
electronic gear out and fiddling inside devices and machines.

> While I'm far smarter than the vast majority of posters here, even I'm not
> intelligent enough to find a free offline traffic-reporting app that works
> better than Google Maps does online! :)
>

Yes, the traffic reporting, congestion feature (I see red lines
indicating build up) is brilliant. I have heard that they do it by
noting the signals from the mobile phones in cars. Which might give a
very rich person an idea to get a good run in their car: employ a
small army of folk with mobiles to go walking along the roads you want
to have a clear run at. No, sorry, that is very silly! <g>

...

> In summary, it's likely that Google Maps will nag you to death to update
> your cached map tiles, but that you can ignore that nag (and nothing
> happens), or, better yet, in a newer version of Google Maps than I have
> (mine is circa 2013), you can just turn on the automatic Wi-Fi update
> feature (which may require logging into a Google account, which I don't
> normally do).
>

I have not noticed being nagged but I believe you.

> So the only unanswered related question seems to be what value does logging
> into a Google Account get you with respect to using offline cached map
> tiles?

Mmm... That is a variable that I have not investigated. Maybe I have
been logged in a lot.

--
dorayme

[Roy Tremblay]

dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:

>> The key problem with Google Maps is that they essentially don't work well
>> offline,
>
> Not noticed this on my Pad? Offline saved maps seem to have worked
> well for me. That is, when I come to look at an area (a week later
> even) when I finally arrive there and I am not on the internet, the
> details of the area are there.

The map is there but the *routing* is what I was alluding to.
Specifically *re*-routing (i.e., going a different way than expected).

I tested offline cached Google Maps *rerouting* capabilities extensively
years ago when I last reported on free maps apps, where offline cached
Google Maps would not modify a route (say, if you took a wrong turn, for
example).

Do offline Google Map caches automatically re-route nowadays?

> There are two possibilities in my mind about this business of seeing
> offline detail. One is that the consciously saved map stays in the
> solid state memory of the iPad, written to file as it were. The other
> is that there is caching when being online and the cached stays
> awhile. I am unsure about the distinction between these two things.

That's a very good point you bring up which is that there can be two kinds
of map caches.
a. The online map caches itself in some manner just by using it online
b. An offline map can be manually cached & named using "ok maps".

> I
> could make sense of it if caching is something that lasts a very
> little time (as when you are on a website and a repeated image over
> many pages is *not* downloaded many times) whereas conscious saving is
> much more permanent.
>
> Truth is, my tablet is more obscure to me than my desktops, the latter
> having clear RAM and hard disks and I can make better mental pictures
> of what is happening.

Again a good point, but there is RAM and "storage" on a mobile device too,
but it's just not something that you can often physically see.

The CPU itself has its own dedicated fast RAM, and there is slower and
larger "storage" RAM, some of which is used up by the Operating System and
system apps just like in a desktop PC.

In the case of Android devices, there can also be an SD card, which is akin
to having a second hard drive on a computer.

> I am going to be very frank with you, I am a bit frightened of my iPad
> and approach it very politely every day. My reward has been - so far -
> that it has been very nice to me and seems to appreciate that I don't
> do what I love doing with most things, getting my toolbox and
> electronic gear out and fiddling inside devices and machines.

Like you, I don't open up my iPad or Android devices to fiddle with them,
other than to switch sd cards, which I do frequently.

> Yes, the traffic reporting, congestion feature (I see red lines
> indicating build up) is brilliant. I have heard that they do it by
> noting the signals from the mobile phones in cars.

Heh heh heh ... Google is *smart* about traffic. Way smarter than anyone
usually gives them credit for being. Actually ZipDash was the original
smarts for Google live traffic but they bought them more than a decade ago,
so, it's all Google now. Around 2009, Google integrated the current
crowdsourcing system (they used traffic sensors before that). [They also
added Waze around five years ago.]

You are correct that they use most people's devices to figure out the
traffic pattern, It's genius on their part, because it's so simple, and
obvious, and yet they're the first ones to do it that way.

I've had GPS and Garmin devices for decades, well before cellphones
existed, where some had traffic (I think sourced by Inrix), but where it
always sucked. The radio had traffic, and it always sucked. Google traffic
is pretty good by way of comparison. My phone doesn't contribute to the
traffic, but most people don't know how to set up their mobile device to
opt out, so they wittingly or unwittingly contribute to the traffic data
collection.

With respect to privacy, you have to always bear in mind that the
government and criminals are always greedy. Without understanding that
greed, you can never understand privacy. So, while Google may strive to
delete the data it collects, governments and criminals can (and do) tap
into that data for their nefarious purposes.

> Which might give a
> very rich person an idea to get a good run in their car: employ a
> small army of folk with mobiles to go walking along the roads you want
> to have a clear run at. No, sorry, that is very silly! <g>

Your point about money is similar to my point about greed. The government
and criminal enterprises are chock full of money which can be used to fund
their greed. If I had only a million bucks, it would be amazing what I
could do with that to spy on others - so imagine what the government and
criminals do with billions.

In a nearby town, they don't like people cutting across the streets to
skirt traffic so what some residents do is report fake accidents on their
road. It was reported in the news that the residents were actually planning
the fake accidents, so that multiple people would report the same fake
accident.

Eventually the town got into the act to ask Waze to stop directing people
through side streets, and from what I gathered, Waze told them to shove it.
So the town now habitually closes the roads, physically, after passing a
law that allows them to do that. They report it to Waze ahead of time so
that people aren't inconvenienced who don't know of the road closures ahead
of time (they put out signs for the local residents).

The only problem, as I see it, is that they close the road totally, so,
even local residents can't use it past that point.

>> So the only unanswered related question seems to be what value does logging
>> into a Google Account get you with respect to using offline cached map
>> tiles?
>
> Mmm... That is a variable that I have not investigated. Maybe I have
> been logged in a lot.

I don't see *any* value to being logged in other than the account will
remember your favorite places, whereas Google Maps for me, since I don't
log in, doesn't remember where I've been.

However, do remember that all iPhones that have Google Maps open and
Android phones that have location services turned on send your location and
speed to Google servers.

[dorayme]

In article <oln2ko$dfp$5...@gioia.aioe.org>,

Roy Tremblay <rmbla...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:
>
> >> The key problem with Google Maps is that they essentially don't work well
> >> offline,
> >
> > Not noticed this on my Pad? Offline saved maps seem to have worked
> > well for me. That is, when I come to look at an area (a week later
> > even) when I finally arrive there and I am not on the internet, the
> > details of the area are there.
>
> The map is there but the *routing* is what I was alluding to.
> Specifically *re*-routing (i.e., going a different way than expected).
>
> I tested offline cached Google Maps *rerouting* capabilities extensively
> years ago when I last reported on free maps apps, where offline cached
> Google Maps would not modify a route (say, if you took a wrong turn, for
> example).
>
> Do offline Google Map caches automatically re-route nowadays?

I would think not this. In fact, I sort of remember G saying
specifically that offline it cannot guide you with times and ways of
getting places (both routes and modes of transport). What we do when
touring is take snaps of the routes while on wifi or cellular before
setting out for the day (in case of no internet later).

--
dorayme

[Roy Tremblay]

dorayme <do_r...@bigpond.com> actually wrote:

> I would think not this. In fact, I sort of remember G saying
> specifically that offline it cannot guide you with times and ways of
> getting places (both routes and modes of transport). What we do when
> touring is take snaps of the routes while on wifi or cellular before
> setting out for the day (in case of no internet later).

Seems to me that the solution needs to fit the problem set, where, in my
case, the problem set is that the iPad has only the free 200MB/month from
T-Mobile, so, I need to conserve on map data.

The easiest way to conserve on map data is to use any free offline roadmap
app such as copilot on iOS whose (Navtech?) maps are as accurate as
Google's maps (IMHO). On Android, there are more free offline roadmap
choices, such as MapFactor Navigator or OSMAnd~ - but on either iOS or
Android, decent free offline roadmap apps abound.

In general, the free offline roadmap apps suck in only two ways that Google
Maps excel in, which are ad-hoc (a) traffic, and ad-hoc (b) POIs/Address
lookups.

For such ad-hoc things, then I can use Google Maps, momentarily, and then
go back to the offline map apps.

Of course, if you don't have a data constraint, and if you know that you'll
be on cellular 100% of the trip, and if you don't expect any difficult
ad-hoc lookups to be needed, then the online map apps are just fine.

Everything depends on the constraints where the intelligence is in coming
up with a solution that fits the constraints.

[Erilar]

Has no one here heard of maps.me? No wi- fi nor cellular connection needed
and it even talks you to your destination, including sorting out wrong
turns!

[M.L.]

>> In general, the free offline roadmap apps suck in only two ways that Google
>> Maps excel in, which are ad-hoc (a) traffic, and ad-hoc (b) POIs/Address
>> lookups.

CoPilot app occasionally updates POIs and maps when Internet becomes
available.

[Erilar]

Google maps are less accurate than Apple maps around here. Too rural? And
maps.me doesn't need wi-fi or a cellular connection. I can also mark a
location and it will get me as close or closer than either Apple or Google
maps.