Jones: Google Didn't Pursue NAVTEQ

About Directions

Calendar

Syndicate This Blog

RSS 0.91 feed

RSS 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 feed

Top Referers

www.thegisforum.com (58)
atlas.ca.gov (45)
planetgs.com (29)
friendfeed.com (21)
www.atlas.ca.gov (21)

Special Announcement

Our Points

Wednesday, October 3. 2007

Jones: Google Didn't Pursue NAVTEQ

But Google is hedging its bets. Michael T. Jones, chief technologist of Google Earth, Maps and Local, says the company never considered buying Navteq. Instead, Google could simply recreate the data far more cheaply by tapping the mapmaking skills of its hundreds of millions of users — a wiki of maps, he suggests.

- Forbes

Posted by Adena Schutzberg at 08:18 | Comments (13) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Huh?

And all of those millions of users would get the directionality, street name, highway class, addressing, and access routes correct? What's the incentive?

I'd be more than pleased to be proven wrong, but this sounds like preposterous faith in the crowd to me. There are some things the crowd just can't do well.

#1 Archie Belaney on 2007-10-03 09:32 (Reply)

Yep, Wikipedia has shown that the crowd's record of accuracy is spotty at best.

I don't think that such a map wiki would work - there are too many people out there who would just give bad data for the "fun" of it. And for the areas of the country that is sparsely populated, that incorrect data could live on for years without correction.

#1.1 walt (Link) on 2007-10-03 10:49 (Reply)

Right or wrong, who assumes the liability? Hard to build a business around volunteered information with no ability to QA/QC the results.

There's a lot more than car navigation that rides on streets data.

#2 Archie Belaney on 2007-10-03 11:01 (Reply)

People will contribute to an effort.

However, only some people, and only at the start - then they will get 'bored'.

See http://crunchgear.com/2007/09/27/the-futurist-will-human-laziness-burst-the-web-20-bubble/

What is 'in it' for them? Increasing google's market cap in their spare time?

#3 James on 2007-10-03 13:20 (Reply)

I think most failed to recognize the ramifications of the commission-base initiative Google's already (in some instances) provided their users. Many of whom are also experts in the field and have something to offer in the model.

Can you imagine? Keeping all that ad revenue to yourself? For what? Or, become a true horizontal, and once ready -- allow anyone with a willingness, and some background in procedures, be able to make a living off those same dollars...

Let's see... Mechanical Turk + Ad Dollars + Image Search Tagging Collaboration Beta = Examples in not only the sharing of information, but the possibility for everyone to get paid doing it.

It can only get more sophisticated, friends. And have a little more faith in your fellow humans...

#3.1 Daniel (Link) on 2007-10-04 03:11 (Reply)

I'm assuming too, there may be something not being said.

I'm not sure about the reach of Googles fleet taking photos around the US. Surely, they are outfitted with GPS?

Also, I think y'all jumping too fast. The paragraph below the one Adena quoted is the real meat. The data would be use able for local searches. Granted, local searches is vague, but one could get the idea it's useful in some "safe" form with all the necessary disclaimers and such.

Plus, the bottom line, is what it is.

KoS

#4 KoS on 2007-10-03 20:57 (Reply)

Although Google could potentially create its own Wiki maps, I doubt that it would be successful, I bet that the real reason they did not get interested in buying NAVTEQ it is that that it would put them in the position of owing the most widely used mapping portal and the maps as well. This could generate in the long run problems for them.

#5 poulicos on 2007-10-04 04:43 (Reply)

Hrm... can you say "OpenStreetMap"?

It would definitely make sense to anyone that doesn't now own a large geodata vendor to support OSM to build the tools and community around maintaining this "crowd-sourced" road data.

And for anyone that is skeptical that crowd-sourced data isn't "good enough" or have enough attributes for navigation - check out what the OSM community is doing with automobile, bicycle, walking, motorcycle and "collaborative" routing.

#6 Andrew Turner (Link) on 2007-10-04 09:05 (Reply)

Broken model.

Clients with high liability applications (geocoding, routing, disaster planning, etc.) will demand validation of a rigorous QA/QC process on data generated by non-organic resources.

Given either a statistical or direct approach would require at least as much QA/QC as the process requires now...where's the business leverage?

Sometimes things are what they are for very strong reasons.

#6.1 Archie Belaney on 2007-10-04 09:44 (Reply)

Sometimes things are what they are because that's how they've been done and people haven't yet questioned it.

There are services showing up that are validating crowd-sourced data (see CloudMade). Also, what is the intrinsic trust of two people in a car that says "NAVTEQ"?

It's not like there aren't errors currently in my "highly-qualified" system. The difference is that when I find an error in OSM, I can fix it. Who cares more about my neighborhood and areas of interest: me or a commercial company?

I agree that for "mission critical" applications you want 'trusted data' (though for many companies that just means 'someone I can sue'). but for finding directions for my car or mobile handset or web map, solutions like OSM are terrific.

Also, see what OSM has done with the Netherlands data from AND.

#6.1.1 Andrew Turner (Link) on 2007-10-04 09:48 (Reply)

It's not about suing people - that is really the last thing you want to be doning - it is expensive, risky, and in the end it's only the lawers who win.

If you are paying for a service (lets say NAVTEC data) and it has errors, you can say to NAVTEC: "Correct the data, or I will give my money to someone else".
This is how the market works.
You can not say this to anyone who gives you something for free. Yes, you can fix it yourself -- but when it comes to data, do you really want to do that?

With OSS you have complete control and can fix problems in the source code yourself. With data, I can not simply sit down and fix it myself. I have to rely on others to get it right. If it is their job to do this, then they are motivated to get it right. If they are doing it as a hobby, then you get what you pay for.

Don't get me wrong - for some applications such as a some local club's website, this may be good enough. But when I am trying to sell a service, my customers will complain if my maps are wrong and they will threaten to not give me their money anymore.
So I am motivated to find a source of data that I can rely on - and who I can say the same thing to.

#6.1.1.1 Tscott on 2007-10-04 10:42 (Reply)

I believe the same arguments were used originally about Open-Source software (where's my support? I don't know how to fix code!)

And as such an industry showed up around it that did just that - provide support.

The difference now is, I don't need to know how to build a road or how the data is stored to just give it the right name. And yes, I would like to edit my data.

Regarding editing NAVTEQ or TeleAtlas data - I still haven't heard a case where someone has been able to have data updated by them (and distributed to vendors) in a reasonable timeframe. I've heard approx 2 years turn around - and money isn't an issue.

Anyways, time will tell - seems to be going well so far.

#6.1.1.1.1 Andrew Turner (Link) on 2007-10-04 14:27 (Reply)

I agree with you about OSS.
But here is the problem with geographic data.
If there is an error in the data, I will have to physically send someone to that location to get the correct data. This adds up, the more places you need to go and there is a significant incremental cost.

With software, if I already have programmers on staff (which I do, because I am in a software company in the first place), I can ask one person to fix the different problems in many different places in the software at no extra cost for each fix - other than their time.

You are correct about NAVTEQ and TeleAtals taking far_too_long to update their data. I think one of them should see this as an opportunity. They should provide a way to incorporate customer feedback in a more timeley manner - that would be a way to take more customers from the other data vendor!

#6.1.1.1.1.1 Tscott on 2007-10-04 14:52 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Advertisers

Polls

What's your preferred format for electronic publications?

	July '09
Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31