Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Cloud Google Software Upgrades

Google Sunsetting Old Version of Google Maps 222

New submitter Robertgilberts writes with word that Google is dropping the old version of Maps. The new version of Google Maps came out of preview back in February 2014 and was in beta for several months before that. The only way to access the old version of Google Maps was via a special URL or if you had a very old browser that did not support the new version of Google Maps. Consolation prize: There will still be a lighter-weight version, which "drops out many of the neat Google Maps features in exchange for speed and compatibility."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Sunsetting Old Version of Google Maps

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:32AM (#49485369)

    The old version has the zoom controls where they should be and has less zooming animations and is much clearer to use all respects.

    • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:41AM (#49485479) Homepage

      I didn't even know that the old one was still available, so I've been forced to use the new one. And despite all of the usage, I still hate it. Do they not focus test these sort of things?

      The "clearer to use" thing is absolutely true, there's all of these buttons that do things that the vast majority of users are never going to want to do, and the functionality that people do all the time is buried. I've had to search online for how to do simple tasks way more often than I should have.

      At least it's not the worst revamp I've had to deal with - the worst has to be GIMP, no contest.

      • by theshowmecanuck ( 703852 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:11AM (#49485753) Journal
        They focus test for all the advertising spam that pops shows up instead of what you're really trying to search for.
      • by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @12:08PM (#49486311) Journal

        Do they not focus test these sort of things?

        I think they focus test it by showing it to all the other google employees and saying something like:

        a: Hey look at this it's really cool
        b: ooh shiny let me have a play
        a: yeah but checkout this cool animation
        b: sweet that's awesome
        a: yeah, oh and this we made the area for viewing cool ainmations bigger by removing all the ui
        b: so how do I...?
        a: yeah just type "OK Maps" into the search bar
        b: oh cool that's really clever
        a: so, ship it right?
        b: yeah! this is way better than the old one!

        So if you're on a permanent high speed wired connection (or 4G), have a very top-end computer and spend more time scrolling round and looking at pretty stuff than actually using it as a map (who needs to actually leave SF anyway?) then it's way better.

        For everyone else not actually located at Mountain View, it sucks.

      • by Ichijo ( 607641 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @01:29PM (#49487153) Journal

        To return to the old version [google.com]:

        1. Go to maps.google.com
        2. Click on the ? icon in the lower right corner
        3. Click "return to classic Google Maps"

        But there doesn't seem to be a way to make it permanent.

        • To return to the old version: 1. Go to maps.google.com 2. Click on the ? icon in the lower right corner 3. Click "return to classic Google Maps" But there doesn't seem to be a way to make it permanent.

          There used to be a "remember this" option after that, which seems to be gone now.

          Another option is to bookmark the direct link:

          https://maps.google.com/maps?o... [google.com]


          I'll be sad when that no longer works :-(

          • by Jane Q. Public ( 1010737 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @03:03PM (#49488117)
            On the Google Maps support forum, there was a long ongoing discussion about the "new" maps.

            People overwhelmingly hated it.

            It is harder to use, some features don't work anymore (or at least not as well as they did), etc.

            It seemed to faze them not at all. Google asked people details about just exactly they didn't like, and why... and changed none of it.
            • People complain and never praise. If you look at any kind of feedback system you will always get overwhelming hatred for everything for that reason. The question is was there enough hatred by a large enough number of people compared to the standard userbase?

              There's a whole industry dedicated to facilitating change management due to people's psychological reaction to change. They go through stages and the last stage is ultimately acceptance or outright rejection.

              Has Google's market share dropped as a result

            • by Askmum ( 1038780 )
              Oh my. This sounds exactly like Yahoo's move to the neo interface. Or /.'s beta.
            • by dave420 ( 699308 )

              Of course they overwhelmingly hate it there - people don't go to the support forums to say "It's great - thanks!" and leave.

              Personally I have no problem with it, as seems to be the case with most people.

        • by ZipK ( 1051658 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @04:14PM (#49488751)

          To return to the old version...

          Oh. My. God. I forgot how nice Google maps was without that awful, intrusive box in the upper left hand corner. Having all of my window real estate to look at the *map* is just incredible!

      • By my count I see - logged into Google+ - 14 buttons.

        1 Button for the search (depending on what you do, you get many more)
        5 Buttons for Google+ Integration
        1 Button for View Type (Earth / Map)
        1 Button for Help
        1 Button for Settings
        1 Button for Street View
        1 Button for Nearby Imagery ("Explore")
        1 Button for Zoom Out
        1 Button for Zoom In
        1 Button for Current Location

        >> there's all of these buttons that do things that the vast majority of users are never going to want to do, and the functionality that people

        • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @08:34PM (#49490331) Homepage

          Well, gee, perhaps I should just mouseover to see what each button does? Oh yeah that's right, there's not even a bloody mouseover for half of the buttons. Gotta just try clicking them and seeing what happens.

          Lets look at your list. 5 bloody buttons for Google Integration. Which again, the vast majority of people using Google Maps want nothing to do with. "Gee, I need directions to my friend's house. I could really use a button to open up Google Drive right now!" And hey, let's put them in top of the screen where most people expect to find their most important controls!

          Hey, that view type? The one in the lower left, which is probably the least likely place a person would look for it? Let's make that only represent half of the possibilities for the view type! Let's put the other half in the upper left right near the directions button!

          Hey, pictures? Let's make them suddenly appear when you turn on satellite. But not on the map - my god no, why would you want to know where on the map the pictures are? Let's make them take up a massive thumbbar at the bottom of your screen, clearly people will want that! What, people are complaining? Okay, let's put a tiny line when you mouseover the image that only emphasizes how the ordering of the images has no correlation to where they are on the map.

          There's three buttons on the bottom right, to the right of the streetview person. Let's see what each of them do. PSYCH! Haha, gotcha, they're all just one button, and it's not even a button, just a toggle to the annoying "photo bar". The seemingly disconnected arrow icon is the same thing.

          Clearly we've now got too much stuff on the screen, so let's take away people's ability to choose their zoom level, because nobody gives a rat's arse about that, what they really want is a quick link to Google Drive!

          Language input is in the upper left. Language choice is in the setting bar on the lower right. Making a route is in the lower left. Sharing a link to the route is in the setting bar on the lower right. And of course, all of the stuff on the lower right is below a bloody link to what you've been searching for on Google, as if that has any bloody purpose in being there whatsoever. But a link to My Maps? No no, not there! It's in the bloody suggested searches entry on the upper left.

          Whatever flock of drunken geese designed the interface should never be allowed to touch design again.

      • by Cramer ( 69040 )

        They don't give a single shit about the opinions of the people using their "products". I've not met a single person who likes the new maps interface. It's ugly, slow, covers the screen with lots of worthless crap, and makes the simplest of tasks all but impossible to do.

        EVERY TIME they switch me back to the "new" bullshit, I cannot switch it back fast enough.

      • At least it's not the worst revamp I've had to deal with - the worst has to be GIMP, no contest.

        http://www.gimpusers.com/forum... [gimpusers.com]

        GOD dammit you pesky user! You're not the target user! We're targeting some mystical professional Photoshop convert that doesn't care about CMYK, even though all of our users are regular home users that are FOSS evangelizers, and encourage their friends and family to use it.

        For Windows at least, I find Paint.NET to be a very good Free (as in Beer) image editor. Much prefer to The Gimp. PhotoFiltre is a Free for home user only program that's ok as well.

        Interestingly at our fairly conservative company, The Gimp (even with the name) and Paint.NET are both available as downloads through the SCCM repository on Windows machines. I think to avoid having people request Photoshop.

    • by edawstwin ( 242027 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:46AM (#49485521)
      I guess I'll have to roll out my usual feedback to Google when they change something: "Stop fixing shit that isn't broken."
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Isn't it amazing how companies like google monitor everyone's usage of their offerings to "improve user experience" but continue to change things that make people like them less? What's up with that?

      • by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:51AM (#49486129) Homepage Journal

        They aren't doing this to improve the user experience with the software. They're doing it to address the perception that "new and shiny" is what people want -- not functionality per se. They're aiming at the user experience of getting something new.

        You know that marketing slogan, "sell by showing what problem you solve"? The "problem" that marketers have identified is the public's disinterest in things not new and not shiny -- and lately, not thin.

        In my view, incompatibility is a sign of poor vision, poor support, and a lack of respect for those people who have come to you for what you offer. Speaking as a developer, if I come up with new functionality that is incompatible with the old, I add the new functionality without breaking the old. There are almost always many ways that can be done. I never did find a worthy excuse not to do it, either.

        It isn't Google, or Apple, or whatever vendor that needs to learn a lesson. It's the public. I don't think it can be taught to them, either.


        • The "problem" that marketers have identified is the public's disinterest in things not new and not shiny -- and lately, not thin.

          Yep. I think that's primarily because those people tweet a lot. As far as I can tell (I shared an office with a marketing company for a while) an awful lot of marketing is marketing people tweeting at each other. It seems to form an echo chamber and bear scant resemblance to what customers are actually interested in.

          Few people bother to tweet "I don't give a fuck if it's thin".

        • by ZipK ( 1051658 )

          They're doing it to address the perception that "new and shiny" is what people want -- not functionality per se.

          It's not even that. They're doing it to introduce more revenue-bearing clicks into your path.

      • They measure success by how long you stay on their page. The slower it runs, the harder it is to get it to do what you want, the longer you stay on their page.

        Profit !

    • The old version has the zoom controls where they should be

      Are you sure you don't mean "where they used to be"?

    • The old version has the zoom controls where they should be and has less zooming animations and is much clearer to use all respects.

      Yeah, the new one is the slashdot beta of google maps. It might be "more modern", but in reality it is just more broken.

    • Yay for OpenStreetMap.org!

      Bonus it's often more accurate, and can be fixed where not.

    • The old version has fewer of the unnecessary permissions they want us all to allow. So, if we want maps on Android they expect us all to allow: Identity, Contacts, Location, Photos/Media/Files, WiFi Connection Information, Phone, Bluetooth Connection Info, Device ID & Call Information. No thank you. Do I really have to lug around an unregistered NAV device if I don't want Google seeing all this shit?
    • I agree. I have a fast computer with a fast graphics card, and a super fast cable internet connection, but the new Google Maps is as slow as molasses. It tries to do too much, and the layout is horrendous.

      It may be time to go to another online map. Anybody know of a good one?
    • If I could mod this up to 6, I would. The 'new' version is bloated as hell. I'll be happy to see the simpler, stripped-down version.
  • Worked well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Vlijmen Fileer ( 120268 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:32AM (#49485377)

    Oh, the one that actually worked well?
    Thanks, Google!

  • Artificial obsolence (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:33AM (#49485385)
    This is one problem with web apps. I do not have any ownership of the product and it can be obsoleted arbitrarily by the manufacturer. It's even worse than with closed source apps.
    • by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:16AM (#49485795) Homepage
      Exactly. When Google Reader was shut down, I switched to Tiny Tiny RSS [tt-rss.org]. I didn't want to just go to some other system that I didn't control and that would end up being changed or closed in a couple years. Now I have a system that works, and I don't have to worry about someone else shutting it down. As long as I can find a hosting service with Apache and PHP, it will work for me.
  • Meh, New-Maps. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FooAtWFU ( 699187 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:34AM (#49485395) Homepage

    The vectors are shiny but the user interface looks like it was designed by a team of managers more concerned about slickness than usability. Moreover it's only fractionally as powerful as the old system. (Among other things, I bet several people in places like San Francisco are really going to miss the combination bicycle/terrain maps.)

    • I, for one, am really glad they're getting rid of the old version that had all those extra features and didn't react to scroll wheel zooming like an enraged chihuahua.
  • Missing features. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The new version still does not have the Distance Measurement Tool. I still switch to the old version for that feature.

  • Mistake or what (Score:2, Insightful)

    by eyenot ( 102141 )

    Probably a mistake considering the "new" one is next to impossible to use.

    Or maybe Evil Google just felt like making it hard for people to look shit up.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @10:52AM (#49485571)

    The old version of Google Maps works for the majority of users. The new version of Google Maps has quirky bugs for lots of users who haven't bought a laptop/tablet this month, such as the entire map appearing upside down [google.com] and/or backwards [mozilla.org] depending on your hardware. Google is (ab)using OpenGL tweaks that aren't universal by a long shot. So, if you're one of the millions of folks with a graphics card that Google decided not to support anymore, good luck and have fun. Kinda like their support of millions of Android phones - nil, zero, no upgrade for you! Go pay for tomorrow's bleeding edge hardware or be left in the dust, this seems to be Google's new motto.

    Attention Google, you and your employees might be doing great financially, the rest of us can't necessarily afford to buy or be given the latest greatest hardware. How about some legacy support.

    • Nothing I have is that new, and I haven't had the trouble a lot of people here are reporting. But I do have glitches when switching viewing modes, and I find it annoying that they keep moving around that street view icon. It was in the top right for the longest time and I keep looking their first. But back to the glitches, lately what it'll do is not completely pop in the sat view textures, and during that I'll move around and it won't show the correct anything... all this in the Chrome browser. It's frustr
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Also by RobertGilberts...

    U.S. Stock-Index Futures Drop Before Goldman, Citigroup Earnings
    Online Business Accounting Bookkeeping Service

    Congratulations on approving an SEO spammer who just happened to submit something on-topic!

  • Android (Score:5, Insightful)

    by excursive ( 2823185 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:00AM (#49485647)

    Google has "improved" the Android version of Maps so much that I switched to Nokia's Here maps app. It's much easier to use, faster, and I can download maps for offline use.

    • I would install a different Maps app on my phone, but can't- Google's latest Android update "retired" the Play Store. ("Error while retrieving information from server [DF-DFERH-01]".)
    • by jlv ( 5619 )

      Try the OsmAnd -- open source app that uses the Open Street Maps data. Better than any of the proprietary sites and apps. Offline support is excellent.

  • by Gim Tom ( 716904 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:04AM (#49485693)
    I haven't seen the new version, but did see the announcement. It looks like I will be switching to another map service since I don't use one of the browsers or OS's on their list of requirements. Too bad I used them often, but when pointy hair managers start making the decisions on what their customers want then end is in sight.
  • open stree maps (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:05AM (#49485707)

    I use open street maps and never looked back. https://www.openstreetmap.org/

  • by RevWaldo ( 1186281 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:13AM (#49485771)
    Tourist Mode - "Ooooh, a 3D view of Paris! Let's see what our hotel looks like!"

    Resident Mode - "I need to confirm the directions to the restaurant I'm meeting my wife at in fifteen minutes and see if my bank has an ATM nearby and I need it right f*cking now."

  • Confusing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:16AM (#49485791)

    I don't understand it. Can someone explain why so many companies intentionally? destroy the usability of their products? The newer version is much more difficult to use when browsing through bus routes.

    • Re:Confusing (Score:5, Insightful)

      by denis-The-menace ( 471988 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:26AM (#49485891)

      When new managers come in they want to make their mark. Therefore the MUST change/destroy previous managers' work and replace it with their own.
      If they don't, they have nothing to put on their resume.

      • What you say is true when it comes to organizations that have a strong managerial structure.

        In this case, I think it's the programmers (I cannot call them engineers because real engineers tend not to pursue new and shiny for the sake of new and shiny) themselves who are to blame. Their reasons for completely destroying old productive systems are a dangerous combination of the two factors mentioned: 1) new and shiny as I mentioned and 2) making their mark, as you've mentioned.

        Developers can actually be motiv

  • Will anyone be willing to create a working "theoldmaps.com" to go along with "theoldreader.com"? Because the new and nominally-"improved" google maps definitely doesn't work particularly well on my home computer, and having a working google maps is pretty much necessary.

  • by denis-The-menace ( 471988 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:28AM (#49485911)

    When you ask for it to draw up directions, the blue line covers up the street name.
    You must zoom in (a lot!) to see it.

  • by SirMasterboy ( 872152 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:54AM (#49486169) Homepage

    Consider these 2 Google Maps views of the same location.

    Old Google Maps:
    http://i.imgur.com/qtJHOVM.jpg [imgur.com]

    New Google Maps:
    http://i.imgur.com/Yop9CEJ.jpg [imgur.com]

    The old Google Maps had far higher quality imagery, at least around me.

    • by itzly ( 3699663 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:56AM (#49486193)

      The old Google Maps had far higher quality imagery, at least around me.

      The grass is always greener on the old google maps...

    • "Not as good" seems a bit arbitrary in this case. Sure, the "old maps" image is prettier, at a nice angle with lots of green grass around, but there's not a lot of difference in resolution.

      Most importantly, what dates were the images taken on? Preferring new images over old images would seem to be the best default, unless there's a compelling reason not to do so.

      • That wasn't even the full zoom level though.

        Here is comparison of full zoom level.

        http://i.imgur.com/RbyDNj3.jpg [imgur.com]

        http://i.imgur.com/gg3ZeN0.jpg [imgur.com]

        Just see for yourself in your browser.

        Take a look at any part of the map within say a 50 mile radius of Milwaukee, WI for example. Notice the difference in the 3 closest zoom levels of the Old maps compared to the new.

        Old maps link:
        https://maps.google.com/maps?o... [google.com]

        • Here is comparison of full zoom level.

          http://i.imgur.com/RbyDNj3.jpg [imgur.com] [imgur.com]

          I don't think that's full zoom level - your plus sign isn't greyed out (I don't think double-clicking always takes you right down).

          Regardless, the actual resolution still looks fairly comparable in those images (the old map image isn't exactly pin-sharp), and after a bit of wandering around Milwaukee and Oshkosh, I'd say new maps does have it slightly better overall. Also, as previously mentioned, lower res newer imagery might take priority over higher res older imagery unless the difference in quality is h

          • I guess I just really think the 45 degree maps look better, and especially since you can actually view what you are looking at from all 4 sides which results in different 45 degree images of the same location when you rotate the old maps.

            When I rotate a tilted map in the new maps nothing happens except a rotation of the image which is just wrong from that tilted view.

            I found this which is a list of all the 45 degree locations:
            https://www.google.com/maps/d/... [google.com]

            But sadly the only way to access the imagery is i

            • When I rotate a tilted map in the new maps nothing happens except a rotation of the image which is just wrong from that tilted view.

              Maybe you weren't in a place that's 3D mapped yet. When I tried it (at the Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center, or in the middle of London), it's basically Google Earth with 3D buildings in your browser.

              • This is my point. There are beautiful 45 degree maps of many, many places (like where I live) that don't have 3D maps. As far as I'm concerned this is a regression that I dislike.

                45 degree maps have been available at my location since 2012. I'm not holding out for 3D maps at my location yet any time soon.

                https://www.google.com/maps/pl... [google.com]

    • by jbolden ( 176878 )

      I doubt that's the app, more likely the data set. The new image is much closer looking, better camera.

  • Hey Mapquest! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Billy the Mountain ( 225541 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @11:58AM (#49486209) Journal
    "Where you been all these years? Looking good old friend!"
  • Slashdot was only Beta for a while. Google is Beta all the time.

  • The current URL (Score:5, Informative)

    by cfalcon ( 779563 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @12:08PM (#49486323)

    Currently you can use classic with this URL:

    https://www.google.com/maps?ou... [google.com]

    Since like, no one linked it or mentioned it yet.

    • by sconeu ( 64226 )

      Damn, you! Why didn't you post this a year ago/?????

    • Like the others, thanks for posting that link! The old version doesn't crash Palemoon like the new one. Of course now that they're sunsetting it...argh.

  • by kbg ( 241421 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @12:48PM (#49486693)

    In the old map you could access your "My places" to your bookmarked places. Where is that in the new map? Nowhere. That's right, the one usage of a map is to have your markers on a map and Google managed to fuck that up. Thanks Google your developers sure are smart.

  • by jdhorner ( 595092 ) <josh DOT horner AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday April 16, 2015 @12:56PM (#49486767)

    The part I find particularly most frustrating is when you're just messing around, and they have that "predictive" thing going on, that's supposed to show you what they think you're most likely wanting to see. (e.g. larger streets and landmarks have labels, whereas smaller side streets or whatever have been left blank for better overall legibility.)

    However, there are times where I have simply wanted to see the street name of an unlabeled street, and the amount of zooming in, out, and panning around just to HOPE the renderer fills in the name is ridiculous.

  • Dammit, I use the 'measure' tool in classic all the time.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I no longer use Google Maps. On my desktop, the dropdown covers the parts of the map I want to look at, and when I close the dropdown the marked location disappears. What are they thinking!

    • Then again, there's the fun of Bing maps. A big label in the center of the screen blocks what I want to see, and it stays with the location when I pan. To remove the label, I have to turn off all labels, thus rendering the map useless.
      • At least you *can* turn off all labels in Bing maps. The new version of Google maps doesn't let you do that. I enjoy looking at satellite images without labels, and that's the main reason why I've stuck with the old version of Google maps until now. Perhaps I'll switch to Bing instead.

  • The 'new' Maps is pretty widely disliked. Google's product forums are littered with threads begging them to not implement this change A couple examples:

    Thread 1 [google.com]
    Thread 2 [google.com]
  • The new version of Google Maps is erratic. Mouse zoom is sporadic and inconsistent. Sometimes when you search specific business by name, it still gives you the "sponsored" results first. The problem is not that it gives "sponsored" result, it SOMETIMES gives "sponsored" results. It's trying to trick you into clicking on the "sponsored" results and it's really annoying.

    It's both too much information and not enough information at the same time. Search for something and it gives you too many irrelevant r

  • by cant_get_a_good_nick ( 172131 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @01:44PM (#49487289)

    One of the best features of the "old" maps was the historical traffic times. Say I need to be somewhere at 10AM; I can get my route, then some clicketty-click and get what the normal transportation time, with traffic, is. Use that as a guess, with some extra slop and you;ll probably get there on time. I haven't seen this feature in the new maps.

    Though hard to bitch about "you get a pretty useful GPS as a (pseudo) freebie*" I hate when Google thinks "yeah, you really want this" when I really don't. Their idea of "you really want this" tends to not be as often as they seem to think. Eg: my distaste for all things Material Design now. Too much wasted space, a big saturated color header with a thin white font inside making it hard to read, too much effort to make that little circle at the bottom right do too many things.

    Anyway, rant over.

    (*) Free as in "Every google app wants access to your location every second... from Maps (makes sense) Google Now (a bit more sense, but location turned off) to GooglePlus (only google engineers go there anyway) to Google Hangouts (no thanks)"

    • by adolf ( 21054 )

      I use Waze for predicting travel time. It knows the speed of every regularly-driven segment of roadway with half-hour precision, and knows about (many) road closures.

      It also tells you about traffic cameras, and active speed traps, and road hazards, and does a pretty darn good job of rerouting around sudden traffic jams and accidents automatically.

      (Yes, this is spammy. No, I don't work for Waze. But I do edit their maps for fun, for free.)

  • Keep It Simple Stupid

  • by Alomex ( 148003 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:36PM (#49487891) Homepage

    I have a dual core i7 2.8Ghz laptop with 8Gb of RAM with 2x256 SSD in Raid 0 configuration. Every app runs blazingly fast... except the new Google Maps, which slows the computer down to a crawl. I just ran a set of comparisons and the "new and improved" google maps load times were 3-5x slower than the old google maps.

    Moreover, I have yet to find a useful feature in the new maps that is not present in the old version.

    This boys and girls is how companies come to be functional retards: anyone can tell the old version is better and it is just a switch of a button away from coming back, but internal politics and committees stop this from happening... as if this wasn't enough, now the company doubles down and makes an even stupider decision: removing the previous, faster and superior version.

    This phenomena has been studied by Organizational Management types. Decisions taken by committees often match those taken by a person with an 80 IQ level. In this case, that number would be generous.

  • (1) my old personal maps (MyPlaces)? I've generated a few over the years that I still refer back to once in a while. I didn't see any migration path to the new version for those.

    (2) the custom tools in the old version? One of the most useful for me personally was the distance measuring tool which gave a straight line distance between 2 points (or a series of points) that you marked on a map. Don't think that's there in the new version either.

    Loss of these functionality alone means that being forced on
    • You know what? I appear to be uninformed or behind the times on both scores.

      (1) apparently there's a way to export MyPlaces maps in KML format from old Maps and then import them into new Maps. I haven't tested it yet, but the Google Maps Help Forum group [google.com] reports that it does exist.

      (2) new Google Maps has both a line drawing tool (for custom route display) and a distance tool (for measuring distances over a single distance or a custom route).

      I'll make the switch.
  • Over the years I wrote a bunch of [adamfranco.com] applications [github.com] that generate KML files to be loaded in Google Earth and [if they weren't too big] in Google Maps. The old Google maps made this really easy because you could just put the KML file's URL in the search field and it would load it. The new version makes sharing these a lot harder [google.com] because you can't just share a URL, you now have to go through importing into My Maps or setting up additional custom displays using the Javascript API.

    If anyone knows an easier way to gi

  • New Google Maps doesn't print well, making it undesirable for it's most important use -- taking a map with you.

    Of all things, Bing Maps is looking good. I've been using it some already, and will probably fully switch unless Google makes its product properly usable again. Yes, Google is driving me to a Microsoft product. Pigs have grown wings and Hell is looking a bit frosty right now.

  • I have never successfully printed a map on one page with the new google maps. It makes a godawful mess of it. Most commonly, the map prints in teeny tiny mode that is completely useless.

    Clearly, they are favouring smartphones over printed maps which is a real shame because their old product printed maps perfectly. I have tried other maping programs such as mapquest and bingmaps however the address is frequently in the wrong place on both of those.

"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra