Difference between Google Map Maker and OpenStreetMap (OSM) and Wikimapia?
Dan Dascalescu
at Google. The Wikipedia page on Google Map Maker states:
"The project is similar to OpenStreetMap, but unlike OSM
which provides its map data under a Creative Commons
license, any maps created by users of Google Map Maker
are the intellectual property of Google."
OpenStreetMaps is free, more open, already in place, has extensive
coverage, and lots of mechanisms to improve maps: software that parse
GPS tracks and uploads the data to OSM, browser-based map editor, and
even an Android GPS navigation app that maps unknown places as you
drive through them (AndNav2). OSM lets us in the USA, UK, Australia
and other "well-mapped commercially" countries update the map with
punctual local knowledge which the big commercial guys don't bother
with (new or temporarily closed roads, location of post boxes etc.).
Wikimapia is also completely open, CC-licensed, and has identified of
some of the most obscure buildings you'd want.
Therefore, I have a few questions:
In the context of OSM, what is the purpose of Google Map Maker?
How is Map Maker / Map Your World better than Open Street Maps?
Why split the community between the two projects?
Licensing questions (ref. http://www.google.com/mapmaker/mapfiles/s/terms_mapmaker.html):
Can't GMM simply slurp all the data from OSM, then build off that?
How will the GMM data be available? For example, 3rd navigation
software is not allowed to use Google Maps for turn-by-turn direction
(that's why AndNav2 exists - AndNav1 uses Google Maps, but could not
give directions turn-by-turn).
I'm not saying GMM is a bad idea (I personally prefer the openness of
OSM); competition will hopefully improve both products. It would be
interesting to contrast the two system and find out the rationale for
creating GMM and reasons why I'd use it over OSM.
--
Dan Dascalescu
http://wiki.dandascalescu.com
JenMazz
Here are some answers to your questions about Google Map Maker :-)
Just as Google's mission is to organize the world's information and
make it universally accessible and useful, Google Earth/Map/Map
Maker's mission is to organize the world's *geographic* information
and make it universally accessible and useful.
Millions of people use Google Earth & Google Maps every day. Google is
constantly innovating and investing heavily in improvements, tools and
resources to make these services more useful and accessible -- for
example driving directions, updated satellite imagery, mobile access,
Latitude, Street View and multiple public APIs. Most of the people
using Google Map Maker are habitual Google Maps users who want to see
their neighborhood/region/country represented accurately and
completely on Google Maps. Map Maker data is routinely published to
Google Maps and made further available via a public API and the
recently expanded data download program, which has enabled
humanitarian organizations' use of Map Maker data for relief efforts.
We are supportive of others' efforts to enable people to create a rich
base map of the world. For instance, Google imagery via our APIs (the
same APIs used by many users worldwide) has contributed to OSM's
success. We have previously sponsored OSM's efforts and explored with
them how to work together. A sticking point in these past discussions
has been OSM's share-alike license clause, according to which any data
we combine with their data set must be shared back to OSM. Since we
routinely combine proprietary 3rd party and user-contributed data sets
on Google Maps in order to create the world's richest base map, we
cannot share these combined data sets back to OSM.
There are many people who want to improve maps of places they care
about -- plenty enough to support the existence of multiple online
mapping tools with different functionality and capabilities. We are
glad that many people and organizations are working on the important
goal of mapping the world.
Cheers,
Jen.
On Jan 29, 7:54 pm, Dan Dascalescu <ddascale...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I thought this was an FAQ, but couldn't find any answer from someone
> at Google. The Wikipedia page on Google Map Maker states:
>
> "The project is similar to OpenStreetMap, but unlike OSM
> which provides its map data under a Creative Commons
> license, any maps created by users of Google Map Maker
> are the intellectual property of Google."
>
> OpenStreetMaps is free, more open, already in place, has extensive
> coverage, and lots of mechanisms to improve maps: software that parse
> GPS tracks and uploads the data to OSM, browser-based map editor, and
> even an Android GPS navigation app that maps unknown places as you
> drive through them (AndNav2). OSM lets us in the USA, UK, Australia
> and other "well-mapped commercially" countries update the map with
> punctual local knowledge which the big commercial guys don't bother
> with (new or temporarily closed roads, location of post boxes etc.).
>
> Wikimapia is also completely open, CC-licensed, and has identified of
> some of the most obscure buildings you'd want.
>
> Therefore, I have a few questions:
>
> In the context of OSM, what is the purpose of Google Map Maker?
>
> How is Map Maker / Map Your World better than Open Street Maps?
>
> Why split the community between the two projects?
>
> Licensing questions (ref.http://www.google.com/mapmaker/mapfiles/s/terms_mapmaker.html):
JenMazz
My statement that Google imagery has contributed to OSM's success is
incorrect. While Google imagery of Haiti is available for non-
commercial use related to emergency relief (see
http://www.google.com/relief/haitiearthquake/imagery.html), all other
satellite imagery on Google is subject to Maps API terms restriction
from creating "derivative works" such as base map additions.
Apologies for the confusion!
Cheers,
Jen.
Armen
I've chosen Google MapMaker and I'll explain the reasons behind my
decision. My reasons to contribute to GMM (and currently not OSM) are
very practical and simple:
I live in a country (Armenia) which after the collapse of Soviet Union
is trying to develop and expand tourism (the same is true for Georgia
and Azerbaijan, Caucasus in general). A high quality online city map
accessible on mobile phones, on PCs and laptops in cafes, etc. would
have helped a lot. Then (for me) it came down to a simple question:
Can we locally produce a map as sophisticated (in technology) and
simple to use as Google's? Which is *also* available on *mobile
phones*? And is as ubiquitous as Google Maps? These simply persuaded
me to focus on GMM. Of course if one day there is nothing to do on GMM
I might try OpenStreetProject too. But so far I'm sticking with
Google. In my opinion mobile phones are very important because people
can use them while visiting here. In Yerevan airport you get a free
SIM card upon your arrival (been like that for a while), an SMS
configures your phone to use the 3G network (or GPRS depending on your
phone), so you're good to go, the other thing you need is a good map
on your mobile phone. Google's leading position in search engine
market also plays a role, we all do a search about the place we want
to visit, if it has a google map certainly we have a look at the map
too. So there are many advantages going for Google. Of course the con
is that the work you do becomes Google's property. Personally I think
if the necessity arises I'll do it all over again for a local project,
this time with more experience.
in short my reasons are:
1- Google Maps is ubiquitous: ** mobile phones **, tablets, PDAs ...
needless to say PCs, laptops
2- Google Maps looks more professionally done and is of very high
quality.
3- Google is a leader in search engine industry, the work you do for
GMM will be used by more people (because it will be seen by more
people)
The best,
Armen