Slashdot Mirror


Google Removes "Search Nearby" Function From Updated Google Maps

First time accepted submitter BillCable writes "One of the most useful and intuitive features of Google's Map tool was the "Search nearby" link. After searching for a location, users could click on a marker on the map to pop open a window with the address and other details. This window also contained a link to 'Search nearby' — extremely useful if you want to find a list of restaurants near a hotel, the closest pharmacy, or any other business you might want to patronize. Google recently updated their map tool, and 'Search nearby' is no longer present. The 300 posts to the Google Product Forums complaining about this omission indicates this is a feature Maps users sorely miss. Google's work-around (detailed by Google staff in said thread) are a poor substitute and unreliable. There is no indication Google will add the feature to their new tool. For now users are able to revert to the original Google Maps with the 'Search nearby' feature intact. But there's concern that when Google discontinues support that the feature will be lost. So why would Google remove one of its best features?"

49 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. Just a guess by AceCaseOR · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm guessing the feature was dropped due to privacy complaints, which just goes to show that you simply can't win.

    --
    Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
    1. Re:Just a guess by krups+gusto · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm not sure the local pizza joint is worried that I'll be able to see where they are.

    2. Re:Just a guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Did you divine this from your Jump-to-conclusions mat?

    3. Re:Just a guess by xclr8r · · Score: 2

      I'm guessing the feature was dropped due to privacy complaints, which just goes to show that you simply can't win.

      or to monetize it

      --
      Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
    4. Re:Just a guess by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Informative

      I never used "Search Nearby", so what was the difference between that and putting "brothels near 1600 pennsylvania avenue washington dc"?

      2 diferences:

      1) Search Nearby did not need an address. You could use "my current location" for example, as a starting point. This is valuable or people who are unfamiliar with an area, because they might not even know an address for their location.

      2) The example you gave -- which was Google's suggested workaround -- as often as not does not work, according to users.

      The simple fact is that Google, yet again, took something that was well-thought-out, and was well liked and oft used by their users, and messed it up.

      According to the forum linked above, Mapquest still has this feature. I might give it a try.

    5. Re:Just a guess by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 2

      I'd think that they'd be collecting usage data and be aware if this was a useful feature or not. Maybe usage was extremely low, and those few users, plus chronic complainers who jumped on the bandwagon, are now loudly complaining. That or Google is totally incompetent because this _does_ sound like a useful feature.

    6. Re:Just a guess by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I'd think that they'd be collecting usage data and be aware if this was a useful feature or not."

      Useful to whom? This is a point I made elsewhere in this thread:

      Simple traffic analysis doesn't cut it. Let's say only 20% of your users ever use this feature. BUT... if that feature is very important (valuable) to that 20%, getting rid of it will likely lose you that 20% for good and your business will suffer.

      Seriously: in general, how many people use a feature is only a small part of the picture.

    7. Re:Just a guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Before: "WHAT?!??!? Google is USING MY LOCATION DATA?!? Evil! Evil evil evil evil evil evil EVIL!!! Now they'll know where I am and/or swarm my hipster store with too many customers, driving out all the cool kids! Kill it! Kill it NOW! Now let me vomit up a series of pop culture references and internet memes to express my disapproval of this activity, as I feel that will prove my point! *ahem* Kill it with fire! Do not want! Big Brother something something! blah blah blah..."

      Now: "WHAT?!??!? Google's killing their location data-using service? No! Wrong! Evil evil evil evil evil evil EVIL! Were you not listening to my barely-coherent string of pop culture references? That's not what we wanted AT ALL! Why can't you just understand that we want you to not use our location data in your location data-using service? Just tell us what's nearby us without knowing where we are! What is so hard about THAT?!?"

    8. Re:Just a guess by Albanach · · Score: 2

      1) Search Nearby did not need an address. You could use "my current location" for example, as a starting point. This is valuable or people who are unfamiliar with an area, because they might not even know an address for their location.

      Clearly if searching for 'restaurants near xyz' doesn't always work that's a problem, but it did work when I tried.

      You can still search for any location. When you click on the map, there's a display below the search bar. It shows the address and coordinates of where you clicked. Both of these are links that when clicked populate the search box in google maps. From there it is trivial to prepend the coordinates with 'restaurants near' etc.

    9. Re:Just a guess by Mashdar · · Score: 4, Funny

      Big Broth-er-Google Maps

      Leave my soup out of this, you insensitive clod.

    10. Re:Just a guess by lucm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But those 20% are just 20%. You cater to the other 80%.

      You build for the majority of your users. If you're in the minority, you deal with it, find a competitor who offers that functionality, or you build your own.

      It is an unusual approach to remove a feature because "only 20%" of people are using it. Plus, they make billions, it's not as if they were on a tiny budget and had to make tough decisions in cutting features to save on future maintenance work.

      No, this is in line with other "improvements" on Gmail or Google search. They have lost touch with reality and make decisions according to internal politics alone, exactly like it happened in the US car industry. Now if you will excuse me I have to take my Fiat Cherokee to the carwash.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    11. Re:Just a guess by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      WHOOSH

      You missed my entire point: that is too simplistic of an analysis.

      If your users use a feature casually, and don't really give much of a shit if this little feature is changed, etc., then you CAN change something and nobody cares much.

      But if that 20% of users REALLY NEED a particular feature, then if you get rid of it, you also get rid of those users. You have just unilaterally lost 20% of your business, for no good reason. And make no mistake: 20% is a huge chunk.

      Simply going by "80% of my users don't use this function much" is stupid business management. You ALSO have to weigh how important that feature is to those who use it.

    12. Re:Just a guess by Zalbik · · Score: 3, Informative

      But those 20% are just 20%. You cater to the other 80%.

      Brilliant!

      Every year, just maintain the features that 80% of the users use, and drop the other 20%. After all, why bother maintaining features that don't cater to the precious 80%?

      Strangely, after 5 years you find your company's market share has dropped to just 30% of what it was 5 years ago, and the code base has gotten surprisingly slim....I wonder why that is?

  2. Maybe it's because only 300 people know about it? by s_p_oneil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe it's because only 300 people know about it? Yes, that was a joke, but seriously Google Maps has millions of users, and Google knows how many people click on it. If the vast majority don't (even if it's due to not having a clue), I could see why Google might drop it.

  3. Yelp has this by MrEricSir · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's far from a perfect replacement, but Yelp lets you search for businesses and such by location. You can narrow it down my moving/zooming the mini-map in the sidebar.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  4. Patent problem? by Rob+Y. · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let me guess. Somebody else got a stupid patent on 'search nearby' functionality?

    --
    Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    1. Re:Patent problem? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2, Informative

      That is my thought, too. Worse, Google's own lawyers probably decided they wouldn't win.

      This doesn't surprise me. I used to work on navigation systems, and obvious ideas (to me) were turned down because they were already patented -- things like "find me the nearest McDonald's or fast food on the road ahead/programmed route".

      IIRC, even things like company-specific icons on the map were already taken.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  5. Re:Simple by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yahoo is dead as fried chicken.

    I don't know why Google would remove this feature, but you can be sure it probably has something to do with their strategy to shove everyone over to Google+ at gunpoint

  6. Re:That's not nearly as bad as removing street vie by Fwipp · · Score: 2

    The little yellow dude's in the bottom right.

  7. Inconsistent results by Naatach · · Score: 3, Informative

    I use the feature, but I'm not always impressed by the results. It has my exact location, but often suggests stores that are much further away. There are many times when I will search for a store trying to find the closest, but it pushes me to one across town. It is useful, so I hope it comes back, but fixed.

    --
    There may be no "I" in team, but there's also no "F" in way.
  8. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe its because you can simply pull up an area on the map and type what you are looking for in the search bar (i.e. restaurants) and essentially get the same result.

  9. Value-added service to push Google+ by schwit1 · · Score: 2

    This is feature they plan to roll into a pay-for-use service sold to non-Google+ customers and free for Google+ customers, after you sign in.

  10. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by SJHillman · · Score: 2

    That's the way I've done it, or else just using the word "near" (e.g. "Catholic confessionals near bars of questionable repute").

    I didn't know about "Search Nearby" until my fiancee asked me where it had gone.

  11. The same reason they removed transit overlay by a4r6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Product managers. Agile development. *Lean methodology*

    The business world is full of stupid yes-men who constantly jump on the newest trends regardless of merit.

    One of those trends, in product management, is "lean methodology", which as some people implement it, means leaving out any sensible features that haven't been explicitly asked for. This is in the name of giving users what they want. The rigid way which product managers interpret it means they resist implementing sensible, intuitive functionality that hasn't been planned for specifically, and the whole product refinement process becomes less efficient as a result, with the minor benefit that you don't build anything that wasn't needed.

  12. Re:I have never used it - it also cluttered the ma by SJHillman · · Score: 2, Funny

    For every person that posts to complain, a thousand more can't remember their Google+ password.

  13. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by girlintraining · · Score: 2

    Maybe its because you can simply pull up an area on the map and type what you are looking for in the search bar (i.e. restaurants) and essentially get the same result.

    So maybe, and maybe so far... here's a probably: Because it's not generating enough revenue.I don't know why people seem to forget that google is a corporation and their main products are services... so funding these things is sorta important. They aren't a charity.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  14. Re:Which Google maps tool? by afidel · · Score: 2

    Not if your account has been updated to the newest version, they did make traffic better with the ability to use live traffic or average traffic and a bubble on a dropped pin that shows current time from your default location but the removal of search nearby is a major bummer.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  15. Re: click-throughs by CrowdedBrainzzzsand9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google has better control of ads if they decide what you want to find.

  16. Re: click-throughs by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!

    And now we're starting to get into the "you're the product" stage of Google. Google Shopping now is a pay-for-inclusion system, and soon Maps may head that direction.

    I guess that the $64,000 question is how far will it go before either Google stops pushing it, or before they find that they have competitor that outperforms them and resists a purchase attempt...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  17. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's the way I've done it, or else just using the word "near" (e.g. "Catholic confessionals near bars of questionable repute").

    Google found 1920 results.

    GOP.gov - The Website of the Republican Majority in the House of ...
    www.gop.gov/
    The Website for the Republican Majority in the House of Representatives, GOP.gov provides the latest news from the House Republican Conference and its ...

    The United States House of Representatives - House.gov
    www.house.gov/
    On January 3, 2014, the U.S. House of Representatives convened to start its second session of the 113th Congress. Speaker Boehner honoring President ...

    Images for congressmen getting caught with gay hookers
      - Report images

    List of federal political sex scandals in the United States - Wikipedia ...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_sex_scandals_in_the_Un...âZ
    This is a list of sex scandals involving American federal politicians. ..... Gary Hart, Senator (D-CO): While seeking the Democratic nomination for president, Hart ...
    âZMimi Alford - âZEric Massa - âZChris Lee - âZDavid Wu
    Democratic Party (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)âZ
    The Democratic Party is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the younger Republican Party. Tracing its origins ...
    âZRepublican Party - âZDebbie Wasserman Schultz - âZPolitical parties in the United

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  18. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    google is a corporation and their main products are services...

    Correction: their main products are users. Services are just part of the manufacturing process for producing users to sell to their customers.

  19. Re:Don't compain do something by Badooleoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And use Open Street Map http://www.openstreetmap.org/

  20. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

    "Maybe it's because only 300 people know about it? Yes, that was a joke, but seriously Google Maps has millions of users, and Google knows how many people click on it. If the vast majority don't (even if it's due to not having a clue), I could see why Google might drop it."

    The problem with that kind of analysis is that it does not include any way to measure how important the feature is to those who DO use it.

    If you decide to drop (or in this case, offer a poorly-working, poorly-designed substitute) because only 20% of your users even used it, BUT that 20% of users relied on it very heavily, then guess what? Your business is going to suffer from that decision.

  21. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by Oligonicella · · Score: 2

    All consumers are also products somewhere along the line. Without the services Google offers, there would be no users. Without the users, there would be no product to advertisers. You're definition is shallow.

  22. Still in classic Google Maps by jfengel · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm running with the "classic" Google Maps because the new Google Maps is missing a lot of features that I find important. It still has this feature.

    I don't know why they remove useful, functional features. I've always assumed it had to do with streamlining the interfaces, Apple-style (motto: "It's either easy or it's impossible"). But they don't seem to end up more friendly or usable.

    I keep expecting them to start adding new features such that I'm forced to abandon the classic maps if I want them, but as far as I can tell there's nothing compelling about the new Maps, and I'll keep with the classic until they stop offering it.

    I'm a big fan of Google, and I really love the way they give me cool stuff for free. I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt when they stop supporting things, and assume it means that they're working on other cool stuff. But this has me rather perplexed: a lot of work put into a new interface which is not just feature-poor but clunky.

    1. Re:Still in classic Google Maps by cjellibebi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      [...] streamlining the interfaces, Apple-style (motto: "It's either easy or it's impossible").

      This sums up nicely the trend towards dumbed down user-interfaces. They're spending so much time on making these gadgets and services accessible to the masses that the power-users are utterly being left out.

  23. Re:Simple by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Funny

    You misspelled OpenStreetMap.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  24. It ALWAYS already worked without it. by brunes69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When you have an already loaded map / search, and you enter a new search, it already does a "search nearby".

    IE, if I go into Google maps and search for "Times Square, New York, NY", it shows me Times Square. If I then type in "Pizza", it will find all the pizza places AROUND TIMES SQUARE, IE the ones inside whatever window I have open. This is the way Google Maps has always behaved, it is nice an intuitive, and does not need clicking weird extra buttons. It just plain does what you expect it to do without asking.

  25. Re:Best guesses... by s7uar7 · · Score: 2

    Google wouldn't intentionally cause discomfort for its userbase without a good reason

    A year ago I would have agreed with you, but after having used the now much-crippled Android Google Maps app I can't help thinking there's been a change of leader there to one whose vision for the product doesn't match the users' use of it.

  26. Re:That's not nearly as bad as removing street vie by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    "little yellow dude?"

    oh, and dude, "asian american", please.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  27. It sounds harsh, but by nightfire-unique · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The entire Google maps leadership team should be fired.

    Google is in the (almost) unique position of having outstanding cartographical data, satellite imagery, realtime traffic information, and access to user searches and email.

    They could have built an incredible mapping platform with hierarchical point and route storage and sharing, GPX import/export, realtime location sharing (ie. latitude), advanced planning, map overlays, user reporting on traffic incidents/roadblocks/radar..

    A year ago, they seemed to be heading in this direction.

    Instead, they've slowly been stripping away the features they had that made it useful.

    I remember looking upon the Google Maps iPhone app 6 months ago in horror. How do I send my own location? How do I see a topographical view? Why do selected locations snap to the nearest road? Why can't I measure distance, or plan a route in advance? Why can't I save a place, and give it a different name? I laughed, smug in the superiority of my Android version. I thought nice play, Google.. way to stick it to iPhone users, and offer them a compelling reason to switch to Android!

    Little known to me at the time, my preferred platform would suffer the same fate. The abomination that was Google Maps on iPhone was ported, and pushed out to Android as well! Now who's laughing, right?

    I am literally dumbfounded. Android's old maps application (6.14) was good. Not perfect, but good. The new version is laughable. No more latitude. No more labs. No more topographical maps. No more realtime transit navigation. No zoom buttons for one-handed use. No dedicated navigation button. No arrows pointing the direction of each search result. Bizarre, distracting user interface with clunky "3D" wipes. Still can't share your current location.

    It doesn't surprise me at all that they're starting to remove features from the new Maps for web.

    I'm almost certain that it's a move to convert the platform from data to advertisement. Less focus on what is actual (corner of 5th and E17th), and what is sponsored (Feel like McDonalds? Here are some locations!). I only hope that competition moves in to eat their lunch, and everyone who was involved in gutting it is offered a package.

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
  28. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's so damn useful though. You locate yourself on a map from an intersection (or geolocation if you don't care about your privacy at all) and search nearby places.

    Example: I'm at a tire store and it will take 45 minutes before my car is ready. I plug the address of the tire store into Google and search for nearby restaurants within a 10 minute walk. It tells me that up the street, which I did not come by from, has a Denny's.

    That's fucking important. I need to know where those Denny's are to avoid them more than Battlestar Gallatica tried to avoid the Cylons, or a salad avoided Jabba the Hutt. I think most sane and rational people have used Google this way right?

    As far the maybe is concerned, perhaps, it's that Google really did find a lot of people doing that and figured it was an additional commodity to sell. A local business would pay quite a bit actually to steer real time requests for businesses towards them. I know some businesses well enough to say they would test it out and shift funds away from other marketing budgets.

    A half a dozen times in the last 3 years I've found myself in meetings with the local telephone book companies pitching SEO and their own web based directories as the primary product instead of their dead tree publishing. Those companies see the writing on the wall and are not trying to sue or regulate the Internet into compliance with their old business model, unlike some creeps we know. They would jump on that in a second to offer local foot traffic to a retail brick and mortar store as an added service they provide.

    Google could make money doing that. Google doesn't service the Internet user except with a glove going you-know-where, they service their real customers and those are the advertising industry and Big Data consumers.

    Got a funny feeling that it will play out just like that. A new NearMe(tm) feature with sponsored search results on a revamped directory page.

    Google could knock off Eat24.com and Groupon in an afternoon with their search tech, map tech, and payment processing tech.

    There's money in it. A lot of it.

  29. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by Jmc23 · · Score: 2

    except that will give you paid for search results that might not actually be near the location. Search nearby returns what's nearby regardless of what advertisers paid google.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  30. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can still do every single thing you said above. The people are complaining about some button that you are not even mentioning. I don't even know how to get to the functionality they are talking about.

  31. Re:What's happened to google? by Joshua+Fan · · Score: 2

    Seriously. This is the dark ages for Google. I smell the work of pointy-haired MBAs.

  32. Re:Simple by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    Easy mistake to make, they are both useless at finding absolutely anything.

  33. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    Ok Example: I'm at a tire store and it will take 45min before my car is ready.

    I pull out the phone and click maps. No need to plug my address in the phone will centre in my current location. I search for "restaurants" and I get a list of restaurants starting with the closest one with good reviews. I even have a previous / next button.

    The phone knows where I'm interested in because it's already on the screen. None of the results appear to be further than a few minutes walk. Done. And all without using an apparently critical feature of Google Maps that I never knew existed that gets the same results.

  34. Re:Maybe it's because only 300 people know about i by mikael · · Score: 2

    Because American streets are about six lanes wide, have rows of trees down the middle, have carparks outside the strip malls, which are a further 100 meters wide and have more trees. So it can be a good 200 meters between the tyre shop and the nearest restaurant. Looking around isn't possible, you need maps.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  35. Re:Simple by Chalnoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not really. The new maps is basically built around this feature. This seems to me to be a case of people not understanding that "search nearby" is effectively the default Google Maps behavior in the new version. It only moves the map if it doesn't find nearby results, or if the search query is a specific location elsewhere.

    Try it yourself. Using the new maps, zoom in on a location with a number of restaurants, and type "restaurants" in the search box.