I'm sure FourSquare could probably write a long explaination of why they decided to migrate, but simply put, the tl;dr version could be summarised as:
"We can't sustain a $8 CPM hit." (I'm assuming $8 since they use custom styling). Most sites can't even sustain a $4 hit. If I could guarentee $4 per 1000 visitors to my site (income through advertisements) I would be a lot richer than I am today.
Seems that Google has been proven completely wrong with their pricing. They're targeting the bigger companies, which don't see shy at all to reach out for alternatives which offer equal quality and accuracy. Once these companies switch, Gmaps will also lose its "trusty" image. As long as the competition will keep up with providing easy integration, and API functionality, it will no longer be the #1 choice for the bigger companies. And they're not going to get their income from smaller, unless they drastically change their price-model.
OpenLayers is so great though for these kind of sites, that just need that extra dimension of detail on maps.
I had asked this question of Google and received a response from a Google Maps Product Manager a few months back. I wonder if they still feel the same way.
Thanks for posting this. Maybe I'm just grumpy from trying and mostly failing to get some GIS data for the small business I work for, but when I read between the lines of this statement I read either "we have to pay a lot to license this data, and those costs are based on usage rather than a flat fee," or failing that at least "it's expensive to own and operate a fleet of Street View cars to collect this data, and besides that you're not going to find this quality of data cheaper anywhere else [for now, at least]."
I seem to recall that I'd see TeleAtlas and/or NAVTEQ copyrights on maps.google.com for the US. Now I mostly see "(C) Google." (But also "Sanborn," whom I haven't heard of, when I zoom in; http://www.sanborn.com/.)
I welcome OSM shaking this market up. I believe that the losses OSM may inflict upon the existing map data providers will be made up for several times over by all the interesting applications that will arise from its availability.
Making the GMaps Api is the best thing that could have happened for Open Street Map and probably Google Maps in a while. The OSM Map Data is good enough for most. In turn since more sites are going away from GMaps it gets more popular and the data gets better. Google will probably integrate OSMs Data back into Gmaps. Thus sooner or later Google won't need to pay licenseing fees to the card guys. Because their own data (from Google Streetview) + OSMs data will be enough.
As far as I can see, they have still a lot of value in the direction/navigation infrastructure and places directory (which is where foursquare actually compete with google).
what on earth has happened with engadgets url structure?
tried (albeit briefly) to re-write it to get to the desktop version, failed a couple of times before i spotted the desktop link at the bottom, which looks to append ?m=false, and now the first piece of content in the body element is the word "false", presumably debugging stuff, hope that's sanitised properly!
I tried that in chrome too, saw it didnt work and presumed the site handled it, not my browser, IE9 avoids it as well, even shows a little popup saying the site has been modified to prevent xss, latest FF still displays the alert though.
I really want to like OpenStreetMap, and I think it has a ton of potential, but right now I think it's just too difficult to contribute to it. The only choices for map editing are JOSM and Potlatch and neither of those are very user friendly.
Just now, I tried correcting a missing street near me, spent about a half hour playing around with the tools, and gave up. As OpenStreetMap gains popularity, I hope some of these companies using the data will devote some programmer resources to improving things so that "regular people" can contribute too.
For small tweaks to the map, I found Potlach (the flash editor) to be OK. I've made a few edits to fill in the odd missing road or mark the point where the name of a local road changed.
What exactly did you find difficult?
To add a new way (OSMese for a linear feature of some sort) abutting an existing one, click where you want the road to start, then click where it ends. Congratulations, you have a new "way"! On the left give it a type, name etc etc. If you need to split an existing linear feature into two parts, click on one of the nodes, then click on the scissors to split it, then you can apply the correct values to each sub-section.
This morning I was trying to use Potlach to extend a street around a corner and end it in a cul-de-sac. I was able to get the street to curve around, but I couldn't really figure out how to make it end in a little neat circle like all the other streets around here. And I couldn't figure out the way splitting and joining. I had lots of problems with trying to move around, and also I got "stuck" in draw mode, so I would end up with road paths that went all over the place, then I had to go back and delete them. Maybe my mind is just too used to programs like Adobe Illustrator.
I might try some more editing later -- my first few impressions of it were just that it was too hard to use.
I came here to say that I hope they improve the default map theme, but then I realized I'm off to the Maps app anytime I want to actually play with the map or get directions anyway.
Sorry if this question was already asked elsewhere, but how much roughly will FourSquare save with OpenStreetMap? Obviously cost is a critical factor driving this decision, and it would be great to know how much the delta is exactly. Thanks!
