Why OpenStreetMap Should Be a Priority for the Open Source Community (linuxjournal.com)

"Despite its low profile, OpenStreetMap is arguably one of the most important projects for the future of free software," argues Glyn Moody, author of Rebel Code: Linux And The Open Source Revolution, in a new Linux Journal article shared by long-time Slashdot reader carlie: The rise of mobile phones as the primary computing device for billions of people, especially in developing economies, lends a new importance to location and movement. Many internet services now offer additional features based on where users are, where they are going and their relative position to other members of social networks. Self-driving cars and drones are two rapidly evolving hardware areas where accurate geographical information is crucial. All of those things depend upon a map in critical ways, and they require large, detailed datasets. OpenStreetMap is the only truly global open alternative to better-known, and much better-funded geodata holdings, such as Google Maps.

The current dominance of the latter is a serious problem for free software -- and freedom itself. The data that lies behind Google Maps is proprietary. Thus, any open-source program that uses Google Maps or other commercial mapping services is effectively including proprietary elements in its code. For purists, that is unacceptable in itself. But even for those with a more pragmatic viewpoint, it means that open source is dependent on a company for data that can be restricted or withdrawn at any moment....

Although undoubtedly difficult, creating high-quality map-based services is a challenge that must be tackled by the Open Source community if it wants to remain relevant in a world dominated by mobile computing. The bad news is that at the moment, millions of people are happily sending crucial geodata to proprietary services like Waze, as well as providing free bug-fixes for Google Maps. Far better if they could be working with equal enthusiasm and enjoyment on open projects, since the resulting datasets would be freely available to all, not turned into corporate property. The good news is that OpenStreetMap provides exactly the right foundation for creating those open map-based services, which is why supporting it must become a priority for the Open Source world.

Comments

Re: Bla bla bla. Wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Who said it was open source? TFA didn't. It says people in the open source community need to make it a priority.

You just wanted to post to make yourself look smart. Think before you speak.

true, but needs focus on users first

[Arathon]

This is definitely a real issue, but it doesn't mention the most important part - the part that all the big mapping companies already know.

If you want people to contribute their data (and time) en masse, you have to give them a high-quality mobile experience.

If Open Street Map were as easy to use as Google Maps is on mobile, people would try it. And then OSM would get their traffic/new road data organically. But until OSS developers start prioritizing the average user's experience, they will simply never get to where they can compete with Google, Waze, Apple, et al.

Re:true, but needs focus on users first

[bobstreo]

This is definitely a real issue, but it doesn't mention the most important part - the part that all the big mapping companies already know.

If you want people to contribute their data (and time) en masse, you have to give them a high-quality mobile experience.

  If Open Street Map were as easy to use as Google Maps is on mobile, people would try it. And then OSM would get their traffic/new road data organically. But until OSS developers start prioritizing the average user's experience, they will simply never get to where they can compete with Google, Waze, Apple, et al.

I have used OSM on my tablets that didn't have any cellular support, bur did have GPS.

I think it's better than a GPS only device like a Garmin or Tom Tom.

Not as good as google maps, but much less "creepy."

Re:true, but needs focus on users first

[Hognoxious]

That would require employing real UX people

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Re: Bla bla bla. Wrong

[93 Escort Wagon]

The submission does, at one point, refer to “purists” who would object to Google’s proprietary maps on principle. Those same purists might very well object to OpenStreetMap because of the non-GPL licensing terms used by the project.

So while the GP did appear to be correcting something which wasn’t actually stated in the submission, talking about the license behind OpenStreetMap seems like a valid topic of discussion.

Re:Please take a close look at the project

[AmiMoJo]

The main issue with OpenStreetMap is that it is very labour intensive. It relies on humans to do far too much of the work.

Google gets most of its map data from AI doing image recognition these days. They buy satellite images and have the AI trace out roads and buildings. The AI can even see the shape of buildings, which is why everywhere has accurate 3D buildings on Google Maps now.

Then they send round Street View cars which read things like door numbers and traffic signs. They can read business names too. They can recognize bus stops, gates and entrances, zebra crossings and other features of the landscape.

Not only does that mean that their maps are up to date and extremely accurate, it also massively reduces the amount of work that humans have to do.

OpenStreetMap should think about ways to do something similar. Open source street view pods, photos captures by drones, dashcam footage processing... Anything to automate the process.

Why doesn't the government do this?

[Oceanplexian]

I'm usually not one to suggest that the government take over private services but it seems like it would make a lot of sense that local governments should publish street map data in a public format. After all, they're the ones who build the roads in the first place. It seems like the tools and current tools they use to do mapping and surveying is in ancient, scanned document formats, or sitting in a filing cabinet somewhere gathering dust.