[OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq

Dave F. davefox at madasafish.com
Wed Feb 3 15:22:10 GMT 2010


Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I don't think that the line is between "hobby" and "professional".
>
> OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with 
> their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive 
> advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when 
> they *already have* TeleAtlas data.
>
> The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality 
> standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long 
> turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no 
> fixed tagging schema, *no minimum quality standards*

& you see that as a positive? Did you mean to write it that way?

>  and anyone can map. 
> We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. 
> Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different.
>
> I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. 
> Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more 
> quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are 
> TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because 
> nobody does it for fun any more.
>
> So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really "take it or leave it", and if 
> someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, 
> let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this "VERY disillusioning"; 
> what was his illusion then? 

A regular here (Foundation member?) said that OSM would perceived to be 
a success when someone like Google used OSM data.

I agree with that when meaning Google's wide scope of deployment.

I wouldn't be disappointed if a map creator criticized OSM out of hand 
because it's free & created by the public & therefore must be poor.

They could always be talked around, but the examples given here are of 
organizations who have spent a lot of time, effort & money trying to 
integrate OSM into their systems. For them to conclude that OSM isn't 
good enough is disillusioning.


> For OSM to rule the world? I think the world 
> is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches 
> that with a "one size fits all" 

But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment.
Even the maps produced now with OSM data are expected to be accepted 
with the OSM foibles built in.

--------------------------------

In some following posts commercial ventures have been mentioned. I see 
this as an irrelevance.

Whether the map use is to make money or not , if these ventures aren't 
taking the data because it's unusable then OSM has to be considered to 
be failing. Again, disillusioning.


Cheers
Dave F.







More information about the talk mailing list