09 Feb 2005 | David said...

As of this morning at 10AM I have made the switch. We have a winner.

09 Feb 2005 | Casey Gollan said...

Ooooh oooh!!! I know this one......GOOGLE MAPS!!!!

10 Feb 2005 | Matthew Oliphant said...

Just looking at the images you have I thought, "meh."

I loaded it up and searched my home address, of which it is incorrect about the location.

THEN, I scrolled. And that's when I started laughing, saying, "Shit that's so cool!"

10 Feb 2005 | Will Hayworth said...

I am now a Mapquest emigre.

Google Maps rocks their UI completely.

10 Feb 2005 | One of several Steves said...

There is one major, enormous element of the Google Maps UI that absoutely sucks, and will prevent me from raving about it until it's changed.

It's that right hand panel of example searches. Try entering driving directions there using the format they have, going from a specific address in a specific city to another address in another city. I tried half a dozen times and failed to get it to work half a dozen times. I gave up.

I went back a day later, and finally noticed the "real" search box is at the top, and there's this handy directions link. Works fine there. But I'm sure I'm not going to be the only one thrown off by the search boxes on the right.

Other complaints: Right idea with showing locations of points of interest, services, etc., but at least for my area, it's horribly inaccurate. Yahoo is doing a better job with this right now. And out here in LA, the ability to instantly see current traffic conditions on your map is a godsend.

Yes, it is all about the experience. And right now, the Google Maps experience leaves quite a bit to be desired. I'm still going to Yahoo for my maps next time.

10 Feb 2005 | sloan said...

Yeah, the search box doesn't let you know that you are searching within the context of the area that you are looking at either. But the map itself, of any location, seems to be clearer than any other I've seen. There is a real clarity between streets and empty space. Streets have WIDTH that makes sense, not just lines! Duh. The UI needs work, but they are starting with better map GIFs that are much clearer than the competition.

10 Feb 2005 | Robin said...

Tough to experience it when you get a "Your browser is not supported" message - hopefully Safari support is on the way soon.

That said, it rocks in Firefox! :-)

10 Feb 2005 | Javan said...

Bye Mapquest, it was nice knowing you.

10 Feb 2005 | Jeremy C. Wright said...

1. Poor Safari support
2. Only US
3. Poor accuracy (hundreds of examples of this around the blogosphere)

Good thing it's "beta" otherwise there might be some real outcry over this. Oh, wait, it's Google. No there wouldn't.

10 Feb 2005 | Dave said...

I am not impressed with Googe Map. The map data is poor, the search boxes to the right are confusing, when down into a map there is no obvious method to go back to the main page.

10 Feb 2005 | Mike K said...

It's not only US-centric ...

Many of the big Canadian cities are in there, and a lot of the smaller ones (in Ontario at least).

Too bad my current home-base of Kamloops, BC shows up as a big gaping hole ... it's interesting that when you zoom in enough, you can see the highways leading to and from Kamloops, but the city itself seems to have been excised from their database. :)

10 Feb 2005 | David Schontzler said...

I'd just like to say kudos to Google for not being afraid to do something cool, even if they don't have full support for all browsers/devices/whatevers.

10 Feb 2005 | seth said...

Screw safari...they have firefox for OSX right? ;)

10 Feb 2005 | John said...

It will be interesting to see how companies who have contracts to use Mapquest et al will handle this.

It's a better service but will they switch?

10 Feb 2005 | Flemming Mahler said...

Map24 naturally
Google maps are great, but when it comes to the online map experience, map24 (at http://map24.com/) is still way ahead of google maps as far as Im concerned. Their interface may not be as clean as google maps, but their actual map with smooth zooming and their way finder and other features just rock.

They used to work fine with firefox, but their most recent release seems to have caused some problems

10 Feb 2005 | Tony said...

As I live in Europe, I will go to viamichelin.com

Their UI is very good as well, but I guess google will kick their ass once they offer more of their services for Europe.

10 Feb 2005 | Charbel said...

you know it will only be a matter of time before all other map sites copy google's experience...That's the sad thing about the web. You have a great idea, it works, everyone steals it...

10 Feb 2005 | Matthew Oliphant said...

And oddly it doesn't work on my IE6. I just get "Loading..."

Same with my coworkers, so it isn't just me like usual. :)

10 Feb 2005 | DaleV said...

Make sure you click on one of the numbers in the directions pane to see how it shows you a zoomed-in image of the exact intersection. And if it's off your screen, it will scroll to it. Slickness.

10 Feb 2005 | Dan said...

Don't worry, folks. Safari support and more accurate search results will come.

I have to say, though, that's amazing that a system with maps as clear, intuitive and easily customizable as Google Maps could be paired with such awful search buttons. It almost looks like a case of Google trying to reinvent something that doesn't need reinventing.

10 Feb 2005 | MH said...

If you have the Web Developer Extension for Moz/FF, try disabling CSS for an interesting look behind the scenes...

Charbel: Just curious, can you point to an example where a stupendous user experience has been successfully copied?

10 Feb 2005 | Kris said...

Matthew, if you get only "Loading ...", it's a proxy related problems, I have the same problem at work both for gmail and google maps.

You know it : "me and my co-workers" ;)

k.

10 Feb 2005 | Benjy said...

In general, I'm a fan. I love the clarity of the maps and the ability to scroll around on them.

My negative comments are:
1. They don't show directions on one-way streets.

2. The inconsistent marking of major landmarks. In Chicago, Wrigley Field and Soldier Field are marked, but the United Center and U.S. Cellular Field are not. Though they do show the Jan Pascente Playground across the street from where U.S. Cellular should be...

10 Feb 2005 | Wilson Miner said...

Man, I wish I'd had that map when I was walking all the way down Grand to drop in on Jim last August. Why did it take this long for somebody to get over that obnoxiously huge (and frustratingly vague) red star?

10 Feb 2005 | Rob H said...

As a former engineer @ randmcnally.com I have to say that google has done an excellent job of producing detailed oriented maps. The use of DHTML and caching all the images was a great idea to allow users to move around the map without a page reload, like you have at any of the other map sites(randmcnally.com included).

Google is poised to be the default stop for everything web related.

-R

10 Feb 2005 | Joe said...

I love the google interface, but I've searched for several addresses where the location indicated on the map was just flat out wrong.

If they can work out the bugs, it will definitely be my map engine of choice, but accurate information is a lot more important to me than a slick interface.

10 Feb 2005 | steeltoes said...

Google's brand is simplicity and accuracy. It will be interesting to see how they can translate those two core brand attributes into a product offering that is inherently complex and can be prone to delivering incorrect data.

The two items that seem to mesh well with their brand is the speed of the map draw and the single entry direction field.

I agree that the UI needs a bit of work; it is a step in the right direction.

As to the thought about everyone stealing a good idea. I think in many cases ideas are stolen, not from what is the best, but what is the most popular. Big difference-sometimes. Hopefully what happens with Google Maps is that it makes MapQuest and others look at what is and isn't working with their software. Hopefully this will result in online mapping experiences far better than anything we have today. This is much better than just stealing IMHO.

10 Feb 2005 | Mark said...

As far as stealing good ideas go, I think Google looks a whole lot like Map24.com both in appearance of the map graphic and in the functionality.

Considering Google is still in beta, I would have to assume Map24 came first.

10 Feb 2005 | Jarkko said...

IMHO the Swiss are way ahead of Google both in the experience and the innovation. The usage of layered airphoto jpeg's and gif's for everything else is kicking a major arse. And yes, they were there a lot earlier than Google Maps. Too bad it covers only Switzerland.

10 Feb 2005 | jay said...

Google Maps has a huge weakness. The online interface is great, but try printing driving directions and you'll see immediately that they just didn't care about that. The image is either cutoff showing only the origin or destination or it ends up printing 1-2 blank pages between the picture and the text.

Printing is a key usage here!

10 Feb 2005 | Dan said...

The online interface is great, but try printing driving directions and you'll see immediately that they just didn't care about that.

Really? I printed directions from Firefox/Mac and it did a pretty decent job. It gave me the map, the starting and ending points and the distance on the first page, and the directions on the subsequent pages. Did you use the print icon on the site or did you go File > Print? What browser did you use?

11 Feb 2005 | Brian Andersen said...

IMO, the better alternative is www.map24.com, especially since it covers all of europe too :-)

Also, I like their distance measurer.

Nonetheless, google maps is very impressive.

11 Feb 2005 | William Murray said...

While it's certainly not perfect, Google Maps improves on the competition in several areas. And if they can iron out the remaining issues, then they'll have another winner on their hands. What surprises me is that no one has mentioned Keyhole yet. If you're interested in how Google may ultimately integrate Maps, Local, and Keyhole, take a look at what I wrote on my own site ... the three of them together would look a lot like that Swiss search on steroids.

12 Feb 2005 | justin said...

I couldn't agree more. Google clearly wins here.

14 Feb 2005 | Jake said...

OMG! That is awesome! And just when I thought it couldn't get any better, I found out I can even use the arrows on my keyboard!!!

14 Feb 2005 | Phil Baines said...

Google, hurry up and map the rest of the world! thanks. ;)

15 Feb 2005 | Bruce DeBoer said...

IF they get the accuracy thing fixed it's a winner. Until then it's a flop. I'm not sure I would have gone live with it in the present form. Getting a reputation for being good looking but inaccurate could possibly injure the Google brand.

BTW - the downtown streets of my town are wrong. Hard to get the address right if the streets are in the wrong place.

24 Feb 2005 | dzwonki polifoniczne said...

• polyphonic ringtones
• U3.pl
• dzwonki polifoniczne
• gry java
• logosy
• sms
• napisy
• dgs-leichtathletik
• nuty
• dzwonki
• tapety
• gry java
• gsm
• loga
• prepaid
• loga,dzwonki,tapety
• prepaid,generator
• dzwonki polifoniczne
• gry
• logo
• logosy
• polifonia
• polifoniczne
• smieczne
• smieszne
• bramka
• bramka sms
• bramki
• nokia
• nokia dzwonki
• loga dzwonki
• gry java
• dzwonki
• gry
• gryjava
• sms-tapety
• prepaid
• dzwonki polifoniczne
• logo

27 Feb 2005 | tom sherman said...

UI and user experience are secondary to printing usability. Here, Google Maps fails miserably. I needed directions tonight and it was pathetic. I went back to my trusty old Yahoo Maps, with no fancy XmlHttpRequest stuff or any of that, and boy did it ever give me a nicer printed documents.

If you're getting driving directions, who cares what it looks like? The point is what it prints like.

05 Mar 2005 | zmarties said...

The UI has recently been updated to address the confusing example searches mentioned in several comments here - they are now just plain links, and dont look like search boxes.

The map also now shows grey areas for data outside the supported area, rather than showing sea going on forever.

More info at zmarties blog