OpenStreetMap is very very good. In many ways, I prefer it to Apple and Google.
But the 2022 version suffers from a number of issues that Google and Apple are both suffering from recently: a lack of focus on who this map is for. Is this map ornamental? Or is it for driving? Walking? Finding tourist locations? What is it for?
One of the obvious changes in OSM between 2012 and 2022 is the addition of building footprints at the cost of removing a lot of street names. At this scale, do footprints really help? Am I planning a walk and need to know the street name where I will turn? When you are close to a destination, yes the footprints help one identify the correct building. But not here.
Here's a Google Maps example: if you put Canada's Yukon Territory into frame, does it show you the major roads? No. Does it show you any roads? No. Even if you select "traffic" it doesn't get the hint that you care about driving. It just wants to show you a map of geography.
And now an Apple Maps example: put California into frame. Freeways and two-lane roads are shown as thin lines that are nearly invisible. Good luck planning a route with this map! Want to go from Point A to B? It can do it! But want to consider side trips or general routing yourself? Nope.
There's still no adequate substitute for a AAA map for driving. I suspect hikers, bikers, and walkers are also poorly served by these non-specialized maps too.
> "a lack of focus on who this map is for. Is this map ornamental? Or is it for driving? Walking? Finding tourist locations? What is it for?"
That's the whole point! Think of OpenStreetMap as a global spatial database of raw map data. An infinite variety of specialised maps can be generated from this data. Maps for driving, for hiking, for public transport, for cycling, and much more: it all depends on what renderer is used.
Can you point to any street names which have been removed?
It's important to remember that OpenStreetMap is primarily a database and the rendered tiles you see on this page are secondary. Data consumers can decide individually whether they want to display a map for cyclists, pedestrians etc. For example, on the official homepage you will also find tiles rendered for cyclists. The important thing is that the data is there and can be used freely by anyone.
Not removed. Simply not visible at certain zoom levels. The render does a trade-off between what it can show. When they chose to add building footprints, it removed street names
Does any navigation software use "simplest route"? As in, fewest turns, stay on main & high quality roads as long as possible; don't take me through strange neighborhoods to save 2 minutes. How this hasn't always been a thing is beyond me.
But the 2022 version suffers from a number of issues that Google and Apple are both suffering from recently: a lack of focus on who this map is for. Is this map ornamental? Or is it for driving? Walking? Finding tourist locations? What is it for?
One of the obvious changes in OSM between 2012 and 2022 is the addition of building footprints at the cost of removing a lot of street names. At this scale, do footprints really help? Am I planning a walk and need to know the street name where I will turn? When you are close to a destination, yes the footprints help one identify the correct building. But not here.
Here's a Google Maps example: if you put Canada's Yukon Territory into frame, does it show you the major roads? No. Does it show you any roads? No. Even if you select "traffic" it doesn't get the hint that you care about driving. It just wants to show you a map of geography.
And now an Apple Maps example: put California into frame. Freeways and two-lane roads are shown as thin lines that are nearly invisible. Good luck planning a route with this map! Want to go from Point A to B? It can do it! But want to consider side trips or general routing yourself? Nope.
There's still no adequate substitute for a AAA map for driving. I suspect hikers, bikers, and walkers are also poorly served by these non-specialized maps too.