Local bicyclist: Google's new bike maps kinda suck
By adamg - 3/11/10 - 10:24 am
Mike Ball, a big Google fan, wants to like the cycling route maps Google Maps rolled out this week. But he just can't:
... The story is that they don't know squat about biking on this coast if my very unscientific mini-sampling is any indication. They would route me on dangerous roads and go with absurdly convoluted, multi-turn paths that would require cheat sheets as well as end up adding too much time and distance. ...
Comments
I use Google 'Walking' directions for bicycling
Generally I find them to be quite good. As much as I want to like the special Bicycle directions, I'm not sure yet that they are needed.
That's what I used to do, but
That's what I used to do, but occasionally that leads you to a one way street from the wrong end. I think the bike directions have potential to be really fantastic, but will probably require work to get there...
One Problem
Wrong way roadways.
I use the car directions, but with some specifications for "no highways" and such.
Would like an 'observe one-way streets' checkbox
because sometimes it matters (e.g. Boylston Street in Back Bay) and sometimes it really doesn't (any small residential street in Cambridge or Somerville or Medford)
This is a duplicate comment
Adam, could you please add a 'delete' link so I can remove this?
They also think that one can
They also think that one can bike through the harbor tunnels!
Well, it is "beta"
It certainly has its problems. A trial trip from Fresh Pond in Cambridge to Powderhouse Square in Somerville has these issues:
Good: includes riding through Danhey Park
Good: includes the Yerxa Rd. underpass (weird: doing a U-turn for no apparent reason just before the underpass)
Bad: instructs making an illegal left turn on to Elm St. near the Rosebud Diner
Bad (but plenty of people do it): instructs going down the Davis Square busway
It seems hill avoidance is given a lot of priority. That's probably why Google sends me the long way to and from my house.
Nothing wrong with riding in the Davis Square busway
It's pretty much the expected route for anyone riding on the bike path from Cedar Street into the square. There are even bike racks along the busway.
"Expected"
Yeah, "expected," but I'm sure still not legal. There are Do Not Enter signs; unless you're driving a T vehicle, you're prohibited. The bike racks don't add anything to the situation. You can legally walk your bike there to lock it up.
how did you get it to go through Danehy?
I said "fresh pond, cambridge to powderhouse square, somerville" and got directions to take Route 16 to Russell Field to the Linear Park bike path to Thorndike St to Holland St to Paulina St to Powder House Blvd.
Location, location, location
I was trying various things, so I was dragging my A and B markers around. My starting point was over by Sozio.
I think the Davis square
I think the Davis square busway is part of the bike network.
Crowdsource?
I don't think there's really any way they could get sufficient accurate information from an existing database or from car-camera mapping. For example, there's a helpful little bump to get across Rt. 9 where the bike trail fails you - instead, Google is routing you up to a U-turn at S. Huntington. That makes no sense. For bike routing, sometimes the sidewalk or a mid-block cut-across is essential. It's got all these little loops where it wants to route you the long way to avoid simply crossing the street. I think they'll have to crowdsource improvements to this.
Yeah it decides its a good
Yeah it decides its a good idea for me to ride down rt 9 west of 495. Suicide run.
Definitely beta
For example, they don't have the correct marking on the map for the bike lane that exists on Comm Ave from BU Bridge to Kenmore.
Definitely beta
It's missing the bike lane on Comm Ave from BU Bridge to Kenmore. The marking doesn't indicate that they know it has an actual bike lane.
Google is a Noob
It seems to make many of the same routing choices that a naive rider does. I often find that that same hipster with no helmet that just passed me on the left despite my signalling for a left so that he/she can crash across an intersection and head down a one-way street is that same doofus who will just have to pass me again in half a mile. Ditto for the "shiny new bike" riders and the "80s vintage basement bike" riders that come out with the crocusses and are often found on very major roads when there are far more pleasant secondary choices.
I look at maps and choose routes for riding space and right-way streets and other "quality of ride" variables that often mean finding shorter or less congested/intersected routes. Noobs will often select routes according to what they know about where to walk or where to drive, not necessarily where to cycle. Some are minimizing distance at the expense of safety and maximizing time and hassle. Neither noobs nor google has any way of knowing that there are better ways to get from here to there.
i'm confused.... which kind
i'm confused.... which kind of bike should i be riding to suit you? Late model recumbent? KMart mountain bike? I haven't owned a car since 2003 and have been a four season [mostly] law-abiding bicycle commuter since even before then, but I have a feeling you would take one look and scoff at any bike in my stable
Choose carefully
I think it's a huffy.
Eh?
I'm not sure where you are getting this defensive attitude from here ...
I didn't say that there is anything wrong with any bike that moves ... it is just that the new to the area or new to cycling folk are easy to spot because they either just bought a new bike (from huffy/schwinn to expensive bike, it just doesn't have all the bike rack and U-lock scrapes on it) or they sensibly pulled one out of the basement for free to give it a try.
I have three bikes myself - a 2007 commuter (replaced a 1991 cross bike), 2006 folder (graduation present to self), and 1997 road bike. However, I sometimes appropriate my son's Schwinn Ranger ($125) if I have to leave it overnight somewhere. Fancy new bikes attract too much of the wrong kind of attention in certain high-theft venues - like the Alewife bike
marketcage.(sigh)
The snotty judgmental attitude from the cycling crowd is off-putting. I long for the days when riding a bike was just riding a bike. Honestly, why some people give a rat's ass if someone on a bike is a hipster, a Lance Armstrong wannabe or a middle age lady on an 80's bike is beyond me!
I concur, I ride a bike
I concur, I ride a bike around the city, but why give a shit of whatever anyone ride. Ever heard of the blog "Stuff white people like"? This fits right in...
No argument there
I really don't care what people ride, either - see Schwinn Ranger, above. If you read the original, bike type was non-specific to cost of brand new bike and was used an identifier, not a judgement. When you start riding, you either pull something out of the basement or buy something new - be it a $100 Schwinn or a $600 Kona. Too bad for you that using basic skills for reading comprehension is just too haaarrrd because it isn't instantly entertaining!
I do care if I'm constantly endangered by the "I'm just wayyy too hip and cool to care about running into other cyclists and causing car wrecks because I'm special" cyclist, a group whic has some pretty consistent attributes - incuding an "I know everything already" noobness, expensive bike, no helmet, and no concept that other cyclists, motorists, or pedestrians can ever possibly have the right of way!
That's agreed, SwirlyGrrl.
Mapquest is far better, because it provides much more direct routes, instead of taking one all over creation.
Google vs Mapquest - Can you be more specific?
and show us a pair of start and end points where Mapquest gives a better route than Google?
Okay. Here's an example, Ron:
When I drive from my place in Somerville to Bird and Reptile Connection, an exotic bird/reptile pet store down in east walpole,
I find that mapquest gives me the directions to just simply drive south on route 28 (the McGrath hwy) to route 93 south, prior to going on I95 south and finishing up my drive there. This is far easier for me, because I'm going directly south. Inotherwords, mapquest gives me the most direct way to go.
Googlemaps, on the other hand, advises me to go north on route 28, then turn right onto Mystic Avenue, and then get on I-93 south from there. That, to me, is far less direct than the way that Mapquest gives me, because I would be making an unnecessary loop by going north and then south. Get it?
Driving time
Interesting! You have to go all the way to the Third St./McGrath intersection before Google directs you south on Rt. 28 instead of north. It seems to be giving preference based on estimated driving time.
My point is, Eightman and Kaz,
is that since I live south of Mystic Avenue, making like I'm going to the airport and driving south on route 28, and then picking up I-93 South from there is way easier for me than making an unnecessary loop by going north and then south again. Kapich?
I know what your point was. Did you understand ours?
Easier, yes, but perhaps not faster... at least as Google is calculating it. (Still hard for me to believe from Third and McGrath, anyway.)
I understand your points perfectly well, Eighthman, but,
first of all, since I live south of Mystic Avenue, and very close to the intersection of McGrath Hwy and Third Street, it wouldn't make sense for me to make the unnecessary loop.
Secondly, no, from my own personal experience, it's not any faster for me to pick up the southbound side of route I-93 than it is for me to pass Third Street and make like I'm going to the airport. The traffic going onto Mystic Avenue from Route 28 (McGrath hwy) frequently gets just as clogged up and slow, plus your point about the southbound side of I-93 being really backed up between Mystic Ave and the Big Dig is yet another reason not to make that ridiculous loop northward, only to go south again.
LOLWUT?
Why wouldn't you go up to Mystic to get on 93 earlier?
Who would want to drive down McGrath/OBrien through the CambridgeSt/LandBlvd/Lechmere area if they didn't have to with the slow lights down there?
The only downside to Google's suggestion is if there's a backup on the piece of 93 between Mystic and the Dig.
bike lanes
They show a number of streets in Dorchester with bike lanes where there definitely are not bike lanes. Some of them barely have car lanes, like W Cottage St between Dudley St and Blue Hill Ave, or Savin Hill Ave over the bridge.
I don't know of any bike lanes in Dorchester, anywhere.
It also shows Dot Ave and E
It also shows Dot Ave and E Broadway in Southie as "recommended" streets, which is preposterous, unless you enjoy slaloming through seas of double-parkers (both) or having no space between the parked cars and the moving cars (mostly Dot Ave).
Report a Problem
Google is asking everyone to use the Report a Problem link at the lower right of the map to let them know about issues with the bike layer and bike directions. So far, I've reported about 10 or so. They recognize that what they have on there now is very preliminary and want feedback from everyone.
Send Feedback to Google
It correctly came up with the route I use to get to work with the exception of a brief stint where I ride the wrong way on a one-way street. I can't expect it to recommend and illegal act, so I have no complaint about it.
At any rate, we should expect it to have a relatively low quality of data at this point, but Google has generally demonstrated an ability to receive and incorporate user feedback. Over time, the appropriateness of route should improve. We shouldn't, however, expect nor want it to incorporate some of the informal bikers' rules that involve breaking the law. Yes, we have our reasons for turning across a median rather than making a U-turn, and for taking a low trafficked one-way street rather than a heavily trafficked artery. But there is no legitimate basis for complaining on these points.
Avoiding hills?
Any idea how much weight the route algorithm gives to avoiding hills?
Just curious if you noticed that it avoids hills at all cost, or where it decides a hill is the better option.
Another Google thing
I was going to mention another recent addition to Google Maps that I found curious. It used to be that if you selected Traffic, you'd just get major highways. Now there are lots of urban roads too. For example in Somerville: Broadway, Highland Ave, and Willow Ave!
You've become part of the collective
Google has done a very clever thing - salted the environment with millions of active sensors identifying routes and speeds.
Specifically any device actively using Google Maps (including signed into Latitude) is reporting it's location at a regular interval, from which routes & speeds can be trivially derived. Thus the many iPhones, Blackberrys, Android phones, etc. (& Google Maps is now on even 'non-smart' phones) are all giving Google a traffic reporting network vastly better then the previous generation based on cameras, news reporters, and call-ins by inconvenienced motorists.
An interesting side-effect is that routes not already identified by Google, such as in new developments, are quickly identified soon after they reach some level of traffic. Similarly routes that appear on maps but don't actually exist, or ones that technically exist but are practically impassible, appear to be 'falling off' Google's routes. Thus the emergency exits off of the Mass Pike are no longer recommended as routes.
For those interested in participating hit http://google.com/gmm from your mobile device and discover if it can support the service.
How does Google know that these devices are in motor vehicles?
rather than being carried by pedestrians who may be walking or may be standing still, or by bicyclists who are riding at a constant and leisurely 12 mph regardless of traffic conditions?
biking from Fenway Park to Dodger Stadium
Would take 12 days according to the site.
In case anyone wanted to know.
Almost as good as the RAAM racers ;-)
The riders that do the Race Across America, a coast-to-coast non-stop bike race, take a little over 8 days. 12 days would almost be leisurely. ;-) I'd be ecstatic if I could do it at all.