Slashdot Mirror


How Google Is Remapping Public Transportation

waderoush writes "Google wants to 'organize the world's information,' but there isn't a marketplace or a category of knowledge it can organize without remaking it in the process. A case in point: public transportation. Largely outside the media spotlight, Google has wrought a quiet revolution over the last five years in the way commuters get schedule information for local buses and trains, and the way public transit agencies communicate with their riders. GTFS and GTFS-realtime, which Google invented, have become the de facto world standards for sharing transit data, and have opened up space for a whole ecosystem of third-party transit app developers. This in-depth article looks at the history of GTFS and Google's efforts to give people information (largely via their smartphones) that can help them plan their commutes on public transportation — and, not incidentally, drive a lot less."

38 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Would be great... if it worked by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After missing three or four timed-transfer connections, I've given up on Google Maps for transit.

    I'm sure it works sometimes, but since they've made it impossible to check their work (they don't give you access to the schedule data) it's a hell of a lot easier just to check the schedule myself.

    That said it does work okay for short bus trips, but I've already got an app on my phone that tells me when the bus is arriving base on real-time data. No need to bring Google Maps into the picture.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:Would be great... if it worked by Dynedain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That said it does work okay for short bus trips, but I've already got an app on my phone that tells me when the bus is arriving base on real-time data.

      If Google Maps used realtime data, that would be amazing. They're at the point where they can aggregate multiple data sources to plan your trip. For example, traveling cross town in Los Angeles could theoretically mean:
      Starting on LADOT downtown-only bus circuit (DASH)
      Transferring to LADOT regular bus
      Transferring to Culver CIty bus
      Transferring to Santa Monica Big Blue Bus, or back to the LADOT bus.

      That's 4 different bus systems just to get from downtown to the beach, and doesn't take into account the light rail/subway system, commuter heavy rail (2 different systems) or Amtrak. Each municipality and transit provider publishes schedules and routes independently. They all have independently run trip-planning tools and mobile apps. Google really is at the best point in the mix to offer a truly integrated solution that spans providers, making public transportation a NETWORK instead of scattering of independent systems.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    2. Re:Would be great... if it worked by mjwx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      After missing three or four timed-transfer connections, I've given up on Google Maps for transit.

      In Perth, Australia Google Maps is more reliable then Transperths own website, not to mention the fact that Google Maps works on my phone. If you want schedule data, just select the bus stop or train station you want that data on.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Would be great... if it worked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It would be better if every agency made their GTFS feed public, that's for sure. I never figured out why more don't do that, since it really doesn't require any additional work on the part of the outfit to post the zip file on their website somewhere.

      I would encourage anyone who lives in a city who is on Google Transit but doesn't put the GTFS feed on their website to call, send email, come to transit board meetings, etc and encourage them to post the data publicly . If you live in a city where the data is already posted, create works that extend the data (or help others do so) to help make the format more useful for everyone. Even if Google stops supporting Transit in the future, the GTFS data is still invaluable for anyone who creates software that helps other transit riders get around easier.

    4. Re:Would be great... if it worked by rykin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In my experience, the bus is never on time. However, because I am in a city, it tends to run every 10-15 minutes, so missing one bus isn't that big of a deal. Google has been nice for helping me get places in which I didn't know how or if I needed to transfer. It will give you directions such as "Ride bus 1 to this street, walk a block, then wait for bus 2". It has simplified the Public Transit process about as much as Mapquest* simplified getting from point A to point B in your car (before GPS was common). Sure, it can have errors, but more often than not, it's good.

    5. Re:Would be great... if it worked by txoof · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Where I live, the local bus company's web site is terrible. It's difficult to use, forces you to fill in forms over and over again when you make changes, can't figure out where you are or where you want to go half the time and frequently has issues figuring out transfers at all. Worst of all, the bus company never seems to have current route information posted at the bus stops.

      Since Google started supporting transit directions in Stavanger, Norway, my life has been so much easier. I especially love the Android (Gingerbread) integration. I have shortcuts on my home screen that will show me the best route and next three busses from wherever I am to my home, work and down town. It's amazing.

      If you regularly use public transit, it's worth your time to see if Google supports your city.

      Now the only thing missing is real time route information. I can't wait until that feature comes to town. Sadly the bus drivers are rarely on time and make a sport of speeding away when they're early and you're sprinting for the bus.

      --
      This one's tricky. You have to use imaginary numbers, like eleventeen... --Hobbes
    6. Re:Would be great... if it worked by PRMan · · Score: 2, Informative

      And yet, driving your car from downtown to the beach is cheaper and more convenient...

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    7. Re:Would be great... if it worked by paleo2002 · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is similar to the NYC subway system. On weekdays for most lines, trains basically run every 5-10 minutes. Its always amusing when tourists walk up to me and ask what time the next train is scheduled to arrive. The flip side of that, of course, is the unpredictable delays due to track fires, random line work, winos pulling the emergency brake cord, express trains suddenly turning into locals, etc.

    8. Re:Would be great... if it worked by definate · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In South Australia the transit services all use Google now, and it's really accurate. I'm at uni, so I'm using it all the time, and I've never had a problem. I have friends who have done more serious bus based travel, with multiple transfers, and they've had no problem. It's made their route planning a lot easier, and they can now minimize their wait times.

      I've had nothing but good experiences with the whole system.

      --
      This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    9. Re:Would be great... if it worked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You do realize that the local transit map and the Google feed are the same thing right? As someone who has actually worked on this particular feed, they're both pulled from the same source. It's not like Google has anything to do with the actual feed data... they should rightly get credit for the feed specification and the medium in which it is relayed to the people. But it's the agencies that create the feeds that get uploaded to Google for use.

    10. Re:Would be great... if it worked by wvmarle · · Score: 2

      Living in a city that lives and falls with it's public transport system (Hong Kong - the public transport sytem here is considered one of the best in the world, if not simply the best), I had never heard of this whole Google attempt. I just tried it and it seems to work, the route that I tried I got several known-good connections.

      Before I have seen bus stops appear, and bus routes. But this just doesn't work well: you can click a bus stop, see which routes call there, and see the routes on the map. A typical bus stop has easily five routes, many have 10 or more routes. Good luck figuring out which route will get you where you want to be!

      Departure times and so are not an issue. There are very few buses that have a published schedule anyway: that are the few routes that run on a 15-minute or longer interval. And most ferry services have actual time tables. Several bus routes are running on a 3-minute or less interval, this means at rush hour the bus leaves the stop when the next one arrives. Literally. Boarding continues non-stop at major stops, and when the next bus arrives the first simply stops letting passengers on and leaves. You can get from most points to most other points with no more than one change, in case no direct route exists. And of course there's the train system (the busiest route has 13-coach trains running on a 2-minute interval, and barely being able to cope at rush hour), and all the minibuses serving less busy routes.

      Google's route planner works well at a first glance, but doesn't provide price info. And that's also important as different solutions can easily have double price.

    11. Re:Would be great... if it worked by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Informative

      With gas prices the way they are, I'm not sure I'd buy the "cheaper" argument.

      Figure that gas here in LA is $4.11. Assuming you're heading to Santa Monica beach, that's about 17 miles. So figure you'll use half to three-quarters of a gallon of gasoline to get there. Assuming you're planning on returning, you'll use 1 to 1.5 gallons of gasoline. So figure you'll spend anywhere from $4.11 to $6.17 to get to the beach. This doesn't include parking, etc.

      Now I can take the "Rapid 10" Blue Bus from downtown to Santa Monica for, I'm guessing, $2.00 each way (I thought Google gave fare info, but I guess not). So figure that's $4.00 round-trip. So unless your car gets better than 34 MPG, you're spending less money taking the bus than driving a car.

      As for "convenience," well, that's up to individual taste. I'd submit that driving to the beach is much more convenient for the beginning of the trip (just hop in and go versus waiting around for the bus to show up) but far less convenient at the end of trip (try to find parking versus stepping off the bus at the beach). So it sort of depends on when you want your hassle--beginning or end.

    12. Re:Would be great... if it worked by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I must second that - I rely heavily on Google Maps in Perth, and in fact it's helped me avoid needing a car for the last five years. I only recently got one to make it easier to get out of the city, go windsurfing, and get around on sundays.

      The only issue I've ever had with Google Maps transit in WA has been the odd special-occasion public holiday or special event where Transperth appears to have failed to inform Google of the schedule changes. That can be annoying. On the other hand, Google Maps had perfect data about all the New Years' Eve special and adjusted services, so they're clearly getting it pushed most of the time.

      I cannot possibly praise Transperth and Google enough for Google Maps Transit. It's fantastic, and it's a real shame that so few people seem to know about and use it. It was a real lifesaver when I last visited Auckland, too, as I could just use Maps instead of having to fart about with a different city's transit systems and timetables. Fantastic!

    13. Re:Would be great... if it worked by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 2

      Do you know what would be even greater? If public transport would actually run on schedule.

      --
      I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    14. Re:Would be great... if it worked by Patch86 · · Score: 2

      As an aside, it always depresses me to see American's complain about petrol prices. I don't remember the last time petrol here was less than £5 a gallon; I think these days it's more like £6 (about $10)...

    15. Re:Would be great... if it worked by Captain+Hook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So figure you'll spend anywhere from $4.11 to $6.17 to get to the beach. This doesn't include parking, etc.

      "Rapid 10" Blue Bus from downtown to Santa Monica for, I'm guessing, $2.00 each way (I thought Google gave fare info, but I guess not). So figure that's $4.00 round-trip.

      The calculations holds true so long as you are going to the beach by yourself, but take 1 extra person with you the public transport costs double but the car costs will remain essentially the same.

      Based on that between 1 and 2 extra people would make the car cheaper and fill a car with 4 people and the car will always come out cheaper.... which I think is a great shame, I always said that if they want to encourage public transport they need to find a way to make it cheap for groups.

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    16. Re:Would be great... if it worked by xaxa · · Score: 2

      This page is quite interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_and_diesel_usage_and_pricing but see the German report: http://www.gtz.de/en/themen/29957.htm

      Last time I read it (and there's a new version since then) it claimed that the amount of tax on American fuel was just about sufficient for maintaining the national road network. Yes, it's on the map of America: "The fuel prices of the United States are average cost-covering retail prices incl. industry margin, VAT and incl. approx. US 10 cents for the 2 road funds (federal and state). This fuel price may be considered as the international minimum benchmark for a non-subsidised road transport policy."

  2. Google Transit is Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a dispatcher with a small transit agency out in the Midwest on Google Transit, and I have to say its been great for us and our riders. New passengers are typically unfamiliar with locations around towns or unfamiliar with the local bus schedule, and giving them a trip planner that is already built into a familiar interface on Google sure makes life easier on them. The GTFS feed itself is also useful for external developers of programs that provide extra service to passengers, like Android or iPhone applications, or even members of the public that just want a well-documented view of exactly how the buses in a town operate. The fact that all of this is free is just icing on the cake.

    A shout out to Bob Heitzman for his wonderful Excel-based tools (https://sites.google.com/site/rheitzman/) that enabled our system and others to get on to Google in the first place. Anyone out there who works for a small public transit system should check those out if you're wondering about supporting a GTFS feed. They aren't fancy, but they work well for outfits that don't have the manpower to run a full set of scheduling software.

  3. GTFS? by backslashdot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    GTFS? Get The Fucking Subway?

  4. Buses US only? by Sneeka2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Somebody please tell this to the Japanese. While their bus service is decent enough, getting information about routes and timetables here is virtually impossible. All the Japanese bus company websites are still Web 0.8, there are many many private bus companies even within the same city and there's no one service that aggregates all the information.

    Google Bus would be a great service here. They have already done it for trains, which works really well.

    --
    Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
    1. Re:Buses US only? by Gothmolly · · Score: 2

      The problem is that their schedule is printed in all these weird squiggly characters. No wonder nobody can read it !

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    2. Re:Buses US only? by kahizonaki · · Score: 2

      Err, I posed as AC a second ago, and forgot to post the link :) Anyways, all Japanese people I know use this site to route (mostly between train stations?), but it gives you all things including normal buses, high speed buses, shinkansen, walking, water ferries, etc. I don't know if they have an english version though... http://transit.loco.yahoo.co.jp/

    3. Re:Buses US only? by Sneeka2 · · Score: 2

      I don't know, this don't look like a mobile-optimized site: http://kokusaikogyo.ekiworld.net/kensaku/web/

      And again, I have yet to find one app that has all the bus information. Navitime doesn't even recognize the name of my nearest bus stop, which is served by two different companies, 30mins walking distance from Shinjuku. There's hardly any excuse for not having that data.

      The reality is, bus information is simply not well aggregated or accessible in Japan.

      --
      Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
  5. Multi-Modal Trip Planning by eepok · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Google Transit is not news to those of us who work in transportation. I work in Sustainable Transportation/Transportation Demand Management and my job is to get people to do (practically) anything but drive a car alone. Since I also work at a University, it's also my job to convince students not to bring cars to school (at least for the first few years) and it would be SO MUCH EASIER if I could convince Google to jump into multi-modal trip planning. Why?

    Well, let's assume you're at my University and want to get somewhere 85 miles south without a car. You might be able to bus to the local train station, catch a southbound train, and then catch another bus to your final destination. However, the bus service here is contracting (sharply) due to budget constraints so a bus connection to a train will not always be an option.

    I often suggest biking to the train, riding the train, and then biking to the final destination, but since Google Maps treats transit (bus/train) and biking separately, my suggestion can only go so far. It requires some rather involved planning for a novice to get from our campus to the train station by bike.

    There are other options like OpenTripPlanner which, when coupled with a well-mapped OpenStreetMaps, can be an incredible way to plan multi-modal trips in addition to mapping out literally everything in an area from streets to bike lanes to sidewalks, stairs, and handicap accessible ramps... but it takes A LOT of work to perfect a local map and then to host an OpenTripPlanner server. It's relatively easy, but it's man-hour intense.

    So, come on Google, pretty please.

    1. Re:Multi-Modal Trip Planning by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 2

      Yes, this! Car+train, bike+train, etc are key ways to make public transport more usable and time efficient, but Maps doesn't understand them.

      Maps needs to not only understand mixed journeys, but which services you can take bikes on. In Perth, Western Australia, for example you can bring a bike on the train (but not bus), except between 7am-9am and 4:30pm-6:30pm weekdays. There are also secure keycard-controlled bike lockups at stations if you want to just ride to the station. If you make use of those facilities it makes getting around a lot easier.

      I usually ride my bike to the local train station, where I chuck it in a keycard-controlled lockup and hop on the train using the same keycard. Maps can't understand that I can get to the train stn in 5 mins not 20 mins, so it makes poor planning choices. This is no big deal when following regular routes or planning well ahead, but it's a real PITA for the ad-hoc "I'm here, get me there" journeys Maps is so great for.

      This is a pretty minor limitation in a generally amazing application, though. I'm truly impressed it works as well as it does.

  6. Re:We don't WANT to be like you... by ccabanne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    “The biggest thing holding us back in the U.S. is land use patterns,” says Brian Ferris, a Google Transit engineer based in Zurich, Switzerland. “European cities are more compact, so public transportation dollars go a lot farther. In the U.S., huge parts of our cities were built after the automobile came to prominence. But we can’t change American cities tomorrow.

    California doesn't want to change in order to be like Switzerland. What makes him think that we would? We don't see Southern California as a problem that needs to be fixed. We see it as an improvement over compacted cities.

    You must not be driving the freeways here.

  7. Re:We don't WANT to be like you... by Ghjnut · · Score: 3, Insightful

    California doesn't want to change in order to be like Switzerland. What makes him think that we would? We don't see Southern California as a problem that needs to be fixed. We see it as an improvement over compacted cities.

    The issue is that the United States was founded on the principal of expanding outward and populating as much territory as possible. This philosophy has proven to result in some huge drawbacks with outward expansion still financially incentivized as opposed to a focus on maintaining and supporting infrastructure. This has caused an extreme disparity in land use per person in relation to most european cities. As a result we see begin to see the core of many cities become dilapidated and unmaintained as well as a huge influx of systems to support the personal transit means of each individual that has become all but a necessity. Disregarding the impact of that many more vehicles on the roads, it becomes a lot easier for social segregations to be reinforced with no foreseeable future of remedying the gap.

    I for one would like to see this discouraged as much as possible and would more than welcome alternatives to everyone securing their own means of personal transportation. I know I've digressed a bit from the topic of the article but I would say that google's attempts to make public transit more transparent and viable to someone who may have overlooked the option is a step in the right direction; even if they haven't hit the nail on the head.

    --
    MouseClass extends ScrollClass, which extends TabClass, which extends SidebarClass, which extends PowerClass, w
  8. Re:We don't WANT to be like you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    It should be noted that Brian Ferris is from the United States. He got hired by Google to do transit work as a result of his thesis doing similar work for the Seattle area public transit (see OneBusAway if you are in the Seattle area and haven't heard of it). He's not some random European complaining about the United States.

  9. Re:We don't WANT to be like you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sprawl is not an improvement. It contributes to obesity, poverty, lost productivity, the disenfranchisement of the young and elderly, the high cost of health care, a less vibrant economy, accidents and deaths, drug and alcohol violence, and higher stress.

    You don't have to be like Zurich, but it's a good idea for you not to be like SoCal/the rest of the sprawling American cities that are bringing the country down.

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. That's nice... by kiwimate · · Score: 2

    I didn't know it could do this. That's because after waiting seven YEARS for my street to show up on Google Maps correctly, I've long since given up using their sodding software.

    Every other mapping app has had my street listed for ages. Google Maps is the only one that still can't find my address.

  12. NextBus is real-time, and better by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

    NextBus has been providing real-time bus data for years, and doing it better than Google. NextBus did all the hard work to make this work - they developed the position-reporting boxes that go on buses over a decade ago, got transit systems to adopt their technology, and developed a prediction system that figures out when the next bus will show up, based on live data and history. They even put signs in bus shelters that tell when the next bus will arrive.

    There was substantial opposition in the transit industry at first. Some transit agencies didn't want accurate data on their operation publicly available. Some of them still don't. But the ones that do find it useful. The transit agency gets all the bus data and can evaluate how their operation is working.

    Then some clown writes an article as if Google invented the technology. This is more like the old MIcrosoft tactic of "embrace, extend, devour".

  13. More than a 24 hour wait by tepples · · Score: 2

    I'd submit that driving to the beach is much more convenient for the beginning of the trip (just hop in and go versus waiting around for the bus to show up)

    Especially when it'd be more than a 24 hour wait because a particular city doesn't run buses at all on a given day.

  14. Not my experience by Leuf · · Score: 2

    It took about 4 years to get our new development on the map. I never had any joy getting the other companies to add it. Then I think Google added a different tool for reporting errors and when I reported it to them again I actually got a response back essentially saying you're right and we're going to fix it. Within a month or so it was on the map.

    1. Re:Not my experience by Patch86 · · Score: 2

      I reported an error a few months back. I got a lovely response back saying "thanks, we'll let you know when we've fixed it", and never heard anything since. I'm assuming it's waiting for a release or some such, but it seems like the fix has been a long time coming for what it is.

      Quite amusing error, really. The town of Swindon (a long suffering butt of many jokes) no longer appears on the map. I mean it's there, but not labelled at most zoom levels. All the piddling neighbouring villages are labelled, but the town itself is not. Cue the barrage of new jokes, e.g., "Google does everyone a favour and gotten rid of Swindon", or "Tourists to Swindon are no longer able to find a route there on the map; all three of them are very disappointed".

  15. Re:i call by xaxa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've tried Google's public transport option a few times, but it's given bad plans. I don't know if they don't have good enough data, or if their algorithms aren't tuned to working in a city with so many frequent services as London, but the official route planner is much better -- and covers everything in London, which is enough for most people in London. Google's is very keen to switch from the Underground to buses -- it forgets that it takes much longer to get from the deep-underground platforms of the London Underground, crammed with people, out onto the street (which exit?), to the bus stop (which side of the road? which stop?) than to walk to a different platform for a different line. It's also optimistic with journey times during rush hour -- buses are often slowed by traffic/people, trains aren't much affected.

    Also, when service frequency varies, it's most useful to know "take bus 23, buses are every 10 minutes" than "take bus 23 at 08:23". I've been approached by tourists concerned that there was no London Underground train at 20:42. Well, no, but there was one at 20:40, and another at 20:43.

    Many European cities, and many elsewhere, have a single website with a routeplanner for that city. I expect many, many people still use these websites rather than Google.

  16. And pulic transport will never replace the car by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2

    Too bad the route takes 3.5 hours instead of 49 minutes driving

    The problem... well stated. The fundamental maths of current public transport technologies mean that they can physically never replace the car in terms of performance. You could spend trillions on it and it would still suck so badly that nobody uses it. (This is what Europe does)

    There are technologies out there where the maths do add up (PRT) and which can outperform cars, but they would replace existing public transport systems which have lobbyists, unions, huge subsidies, decades of waste ec. Egos would be bruised and we can't have that.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:And pulic transport will never replace the car by fgouget · · Score: 3, Funny

      The problem... well stated. The fundamental maths of current public transport technologies mean that they can physically never replace the car in terms of performance. You could spend trillions on it and it would still suck so badly that nobody uses it. (This is what Europe does)

      Come take the subway in Paris and you will find it so packed you will wish nobody used it. Take a car instead and an hour and a handful of miles later you will wish you had taken the subway instead.
      So no. There are public transportation systems that are both widely used and competitive with cars.