Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Offers Hybrid Satellite and Map View

Posted by Zonk on from the best-of-both-worlds dept.

That's Unpossible! writes "Google Maps now offers a hybrid view which combines their map view with their satellite view. The Google blog has a notice on the update. It appears to use 8-bit alpha transparent PNGs to make it work."

19 of 298 comments (clear)

  1. I wonder ... by poopooboi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... how large is the intersection of code between Google Maps and Google Earth?

    1. Re:I wonder ... by goneutt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't get it? Is the gag the the don mills centre is nowehere in the scope? Might work better if you use center rather than centre, pulls up a don mills center at the intersection of Lawrence ave and Don mills road.

      Having never been to Toronto I don't know if this is the right location, but if google has it as center then they'll get mussed if you use centre.

      --
      Bacardi + slashdot = negative karma.
  2. Nice by Jeet81 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Saw that this afternoon as I was pulling out directions. More interestingly they even have arrows pointing traffic flow which I don't think they had earlier.

    --
    What does your Credit Report look like?
    1. Re:Nice by fimbulvetr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interestingly, if you read the story about the dude getting a taffic ticket, he said they inferred the "two way" streets because the one ways were clearly marked.
      It's the same way here. I'm so glad they have the hybrid mode, the sat./map worked well before for navigating, but I think this will take the cake.

      I wonder if there are any streets incorrectly labled as one way, and how often the map (not sat.) portion gets update to reflect these changes. It doesn't really matter too much, although I hope changing a two way into a one way is pretty rare.

    2. Re:Nice by OrangeGoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I dunno how often their maps are updated, but it is interesting to note that in certain areas, their map data is at least as old as their satellite data. A new bypass highway opened around my piddly hometown not too long ago. To no surprise, the completed highway doesn't show up on the satellite (though most of it is present). The map, however, shows none of it.

      It's amazing how accurate the roads they do show are, though - most online mapping tools (MapQuest, MSN) aren't very close, especially on the local college campus. Google, however, has everything nailed. Well... at least until the college decided to rip up all the streets, but that's another story. I wonder where they get their data...

    3. Re:Nice by bmwm3nut · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To no surprise, the completed highway doesn't show up on the satellite (though most of it is present). The map, however, shows none of it.

      here's a cool view of a place where the map is newer than the sattelite picture. you can see where rt 36 extends to the west over washington street. but in the pure sattellite picture, you can only see the construction. this is a realitively new bypass, so the sattellite doesn't have it in, but the map is updated perfectlly. http://maps.google.com/maps?q=westminster,+co&ll=3 9.825644,-104.980974&spn=0.007749,0.015003&t=h&hl= en

    4. Re:Nice by itchy92 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The satellite view shows my pool, though, so - Hey!! I can see my pool from space!!

      That's more scary than exciting to me, though.

      --
      Slashdot: News for nerds. Stuff tha-- MICRO$OFT IS THE DEVIL!!1
    5. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Many maps, it seems, do contain minor detail errors like this. It allows the copyright holder to prove when somebody's republished their map without permission.

  3. Re:Hmm... by hazee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps a more interesting question would be why they bothered to make it work with IE, rather than requiring IE to work with PNGs. How long is it before Google is strong enough, at least in the web sphere, to dictate terms to Microsoft?

    Maybe they're there already - it's not implausible that they could release something that doesn't work properly with existing versions of IE, along with an explanatory note to upgrade to a working browser.

    If they put in a direct link to Firefox say, the takeup could be huge, dwarfing the installed base to date. All of us here may know about all the alternative browsers, but your average joe doesn't - but if Google were to start pushing people towards them... now *that* would be news.

  4. About time! by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Multimap had done this for quite some time over the UK, but only with Internet Explorer. Google's solution works fine on Safari, and it looks clean to boot. Kudos Google!

    Now if our ZIP codes resolved to a single address, we would be set. ZIP+4 helps, but it's still not there yet. UK postcodes, while not perfect, are much better in this regard.

    --
    Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
  5. You're right, I just noticed too. by game+kid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yep, there's a scale. Seems credibly accurale.

    With all this and Google Earth too, I still wonder why my brother uses MapQuest. I guess some people like legacy systems.*

    *I notice they both use "@media print" so they only print what matters, not all the ad and search-box crap. Sweeeet.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  6. Re:Very Impressive by OrangeGoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I dunno, but it must be a nightmare having to get everything to work correctly. I've recently had the (dis)pleasure of doing coordinate conversions - not only between coordinate systems (lat/lon, UTM, SPCS), but also projections (LCC, NAD27/83, WGS84) and datums (NAD27/83, WGS84), and sometimes even spheroids (GRS80, Clarke66, WGS84).

    They do it so well and so cleanly, I can't help but wonder if maybe some of the major GIS companies are starting to worry. Could ESRI be the next target? I know we've been investigating using Google Maps and Google Earth for our GIS applications, and that's quite a handful of contracts ESRI could lose...

  7. It has to be said. by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    As much as I admire Google, I think they really need to grow up a little. Yeah, all the cool applications and features they keep releasing are impressive as hell. But they're starting to neglect the basics. Like getting a product out of Beta mode in a reasonable time. (It's true that Google's Beta releases are often less buggy than most companys' final releases, but that doesn't change the fact that many of their products never seem to mature.) Like putting basic functionality ahead of the gee whiz stuff: Google Maps now has three different kinds of fancy displays, but still can't disambiguate addresses properly.

    Google has a reputation for having a totally unstructured working environment. That's good for creativity and morale, but there has to be some coordination and policy making, or else you're just creating stuff at random and shoving it out the door.

    I hear somebody saying, "But they're making money!" Sure, they do have some good basic products that generating tons of cash flow. The fact remains, their other projects are a mess, and a lot of promising products will probably never mature. All that cash flow is both very good and very evil. Very good because Google will not be in real trouble for the foreseeable future. Very evil because they have no incentive to correct their worst mistakes.

  8. Re:As good as this looks... by tjernobyl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There used to be a significant desynch between the map and the satellite image for Canada and other northern areas. It was an artifact having to do with how the projection was done. They seem to have cleared it up now though; Winnipeg looks much less stretched, though you can still see some funny business in the watermarks.

  9. Re:This'll come in handy... by br0ck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe you'll find the marriage between Google maps and hotornot personals even handier. (next in the popup from the pushpin takes you through all pics for a given zip - link via metafilter this morning)

  10. Heres some cool links to try by csplinter · · Score: 1, Interesting

    1.__ Statue of Liberty [http://maps.google.com/
    2.__ The Hollywood Sign [http://maps.google.com/
    3.__ Neverland Ranch [http://maps.google.com/
    4.__ Area 51 [http://maps.google.com/
    5.__ The Pentagon [http://maps.google.com/
    6.__ 49ers at 3com park [http://maps.google.com/
    7.__ Alcatraz [http://maps.google.com/
    8.__ Playboy Mansion [http://maps.google.com/
    9.__ Hoover Dam [http://maps.google.com/
    10.- Microsoft Campus [http://maps.google.com/
    11.- Initech (from Office Space :D) [http://maps.google.com/

  11. Virtual Earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It's actually funny that they did this hybrid maps thing now because MSN's Virtual Earth launches on Monday which has the same feature. Microsoft also figured out how to do transparency on IE and Firefox.

  12. Re:BUT by jesser · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For surface streets, how about telling me the name of the street before the turn? At least in the San Francisco area, it's difficult to see the names of streets until you're so close that it's too late to make a turn legally.

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  13. MSN Virtual Earth by lastberserker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So why not go a link further? Or perhaps even try it for yourself? Pity most folks here don't realize that Google rarely innovates* anymore; they'd rather herald half-cooked imitations as something amazing ;-P

    -----
    * Correction: they do innovate sometimes, like making green cheese yellow or something equally amusing. Here, mods, do your worst!

    --
    My other Beowulf cluster is... er...