• lewdian69@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    18 days ago

    What was the benefit of Organic Maps over OsmAnd or other options? I never understood why Organic Maps was getting so much traction.

    • Joël de Bruijn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      18 days ago

      OM and for now CoMaps are faster and easier to learn. For most people. With OSMand configurations are endless and people tend to get lost in them. Also the map data of OM is highly filtered OSM data. Meaning smaller files and a faster app.

      The downside is less features, but as always … if you dont need the absent features … its a plus.

      Now whats interesting how they both will keep it that way. My theory is when they listen to EVERY wish from random users (with other persona and user stories) they eventually become like OSMand too.

    • teolan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      18 days ago

      Organic maps (and now comaps) have a much better rendering engine. It’s much faster, while also being much more legible. It’s routing engine is also faster.

      OsmAnd does have the upper hand when it wcomes to features though. I have both and use OsmaAnd when I need to export a route to GPX or see relief.

    • pineapple@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      18 days ago

      Organic maps has traffic, osmand doesn’t. I feel osmand is better in pretty much every other situation but organic maps has traffic.

      • Dave@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        18 days ago

        My Organic Maps doesn’t have traffic (or doesn’t for my area). I can’t see anything about it online either, except discussions about how it could be implemented.

        Where do you find the traffic info? Even if zoomed in to New York I see nothing.