<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Ian Dees <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ian.dees@gmail.com" target="_blank">ian.dees@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Feedback thread on Strava is here:<div><br></div><div><a href="https://strava.zendesk.com/entries/95423147-Feedback-for-Strava-s-new-maps-OpenStreetMap-?page=5#post_39574047" target="_blank">https://strava.zendesk.com/entries/95423147-Feedback-for-Strava-s-new-maps-OpenStreetMap-?page=5#post_39574047</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br>From the feedback, it seems that users are complaining about</div><div class="gmail_extra"><ol><li>Lack of Street View</li><li>Higher Resolution of satellite imagery</li><li>Speed of tile rendering</li><li>Cartography (Terrain view blurry)</li><li>UI issues </li></ol><div>Item 1 is calling out for a Mapillary solution. Mapillary offers smartphone holders for cars, maybe getting one for cyclists would help. Mapping road surface would help, but doesn't get at the road quality issue cyclists need. </div><div><br></div><div>Higher resolution imagery: I doubt there is a mapper that wouldn't also like to see higher resolution satellite imagery. I'd also like more current imagery. Even my counties Bing imagery seems clearer than ours, although JOSM allows higher zoom levels.</div><div><br></div><div>The remaining items seem to point towards Mapbox. </div><div><br></div><div>Clifford</div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>@osm_seattle<br></div><div><a href="http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us" target="_blank">osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us</a></div><div>OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch</div></div></div>
</div></div>