Google Maps just fucking SUCKS now

[vdeane]

Well, I have Aspergers, so change is something I just don't do.  Not if it isn't completely forced on me (which just makes me mad, so I'll resist in any way possible), or it's entirely my own decision.  I also absolutely detest the idea of companies dictating how I do things.  It's fine for them to provide a tool; it is NOT fine for them to also dictate to me how/when I'm supposed to use the tool, and build measures in to prevent me from doing anything else or to make such use annoying.  This is why I won't have anything to do with anything Apple does, for example.  It was one thing when their philosophy was restricted to them.  Now, it's pervasive, with Linux being the only holdout.

I don't really like the changes the internet has undergone either.  I was happier when it was mostly still Web 1.0 with forums and RSS.  I wouldn't mind Facebook if it would stop trying to decide for me what it thinks I want to see, I really like reading comments on news articles, and I do use Gmail and Google Calendar on the web, but that's about as far as I've taken it.  I don't really understand social media, to be honest.  I also don't see why people would put all their stuff on the cloud when hard drives plus backups are perfectly fine.  Why run the risk of your data going away if a company changes its policies or goes away, and why give up your fourth amendment rights and make things vulnerable to hackers?

Quite honestly, technology of the past was designed more for people like me, with Aseprgers, but now it's being redesigned for neurotypicals.  I don't like it.  Just one more thing to alienate me from the world, I suppose.

You also mentioned accepting risks, and that's also something I have trouble with.  I'm extraordinarily risk adverse.  I never even learned how to ride a bike without training wheels because I'm too afraid of falling (the fact that I have gross motor difficulties does not help).

I don't use Incognito, even to browse you-know-what

I think you're the first person I've heard of who doesn't.  I also use incognito to bypass paywalls on news articles.

[MNHighwayMan]

I also don't see why people would put all their stuff on the cloud when hard drives plus backups are perfectly fine.  Why run the risk of your data going away if a company changes its policies or goes away, and why give up your fourth amendment rights and make things vulnerable to hackers?

Because if your house burns down, there goes both your original + your backup. One could store a backup on an offline drive and put it in a safety deposit box, but that is a lot of work if one needs to change the data. I like my method of using original + offline backup + Dropbox. For 95 percent of things I want to keep, this works. I'll take a chance on the other five percent.

Quite honestly, technology of the past was designed more for people like me, with Aseprgers, but now it's being redesigned for neurotypicals.  I don't like it.  Just one more thing to alienate me from the world, I suppose.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but people with Asperger's Syndrome make up approximately <1 percent of the population. You can't expect a major company like Google to cater to you–or even the roadgeek community as a whole, as this thread demonstrates: we are a tiny minority of Google's userbase.

The whole "Asperger's vs neurotypicals" mentality helps no-one, either.

[vdeane]

Because if your house burns down, there goes both your original + your backup. One could store a backup on an offline drive and put it in a safety deposit box, but that is a lot of work if one needs to change the data. I like my method of using original + offline backup + Dropbox. For 95 percent of things I want to keep, this works. I'll take a chance on the other five percent.

I've been taking my external hard drive with me while traveling for exactly that reason (I used to leave it locked in my desk at work, but then my group was moved and my current cubicle doesn't have any lockable storage).

Quite honestly, technology of the past was designed more for people like me, with Aseprgers, but now it's being redesigned for neurotypicals.  I don't like it.  Just one more thing to alienate me from the world, I suppose.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but people with Asperger's Syndrome make up approximately <1 percent of the population. You can't expect a major company like Google to cater to you–or even the roadgeek community as a whole, as this thread demonstrates: we are a tiny minority of Google's userbase.

The whole "Asperger's vs neurotypicals" mentality helps no-one, either.

And yet, somehow, technology used to be designed for such cases.  Google could well add the additional functionality without impeding existing use cases.  That's what Microsoft used to do with Windows (prior to Windows 8).  For some reason, they're choosing to give those of us with less common use cases a lesser experience.  Seriously, what happened?  Apple used to be just one company, and now their philosophy has taken over just about everything.

It doesn't help that everything is being phonefied.  Seriously, why are phones taking over as the dominant types of computers?  I only use mine if I'm bored or need to look something up when I'm away from my computer.  The screen size is too small and the less convenient interface resulting from not having a mouse (and not having a full-size or physical keyboard) means that you can't really do serious work on them.  Yet, somehow, they're taking over as the dominant form of computing.  Apps are displacing both websites and real programs alike.  Heck, just look at Windows 8 - Microsoft fully intended on deprecating the desktop completely and moving everything to Metro (never mind that Metro was less sophisticated of an interface than even Windows 2.0); they had to backtrack when Metro flopped HARD (largely because the phone/tablet market was already cornered between the iPhone and Android).  And speaking of tablets, I can't really think of what the use case of them is.  They're too big to have the convenience of a phone and too small to do the serious work of a desktop or laptop.

I can't really pinpoint WHY everything changed, but I can pinpoint WHEN - and that was the release of the iPhone 3G and the App Store.

The point is, there's no reason Google couldn't offer us a Maps product that was useful for both roadgeeks wanting to browse around and people looking to find restaurants and stuff (and I do use Google Maps for that too, just apparently not in the way most people do because I tend to favor the familiar (and such usually search for a specific place), and because my visual/spatial skills so far outstrip everything else).  They CHOOSE to use a low-contrast design that makes freeways and expressways fade into the background.  They CHOOSE to reduce the number of points we can set for "driving directions" (which I only use to get travel time for and to save routes for future trips).  They CHOOSE to place an annoying sidebar on the left side with features that were only a click away (if that) in the first place.  Why do they choose these things?  I just don't know.

[jon daly]

I don't use a smartphone at all. Mainly, I use the internet for things that require more reading than I imagine would be comfortable to do on such a small screen.

Wrt Google Maps, I do sometimes have trouble navigating to Streetview from an overhead map or satellite view.

[jakeroot]

Because if your house burns down, there goes both your original + your backup. One could store a backup on an offline drive and put it in a safety deposit box, but that is a lot of work if one needs to change the data. I like my method of using original + offline backup + Dropbox. For 95 percent of things I want to keep, this works. I'll take a chance on the other five percent.

I've been taking my external hard drive with me while traveling for exactly that reason (I used to leave it locked in my desk at work, but then my group was moved and my current cubicle doesn't have any lockable storage).

You risk losing it that way. Or having it stolen. At least with cloud backups, it's always there. And if the service ever gets shut down, you just download the files onto a drive and then upload it somewhere else. Not that I've heard of a service being shut down. If they did, the files would likely get turned over to another company, rather than just up and disappearing.

I don't use Incognito, even to browse you-know-what

I think you're the first person I've heard of who doesn't.  I also use incognito to bypass paywalls on news articles.

As I get older, that may change. I'm the only person who uses my computer, phone, etc so I didn't see the reason to be secretive. I'm obviously not browsing anything illegal, so worse case scenario someone stumbles upon my...vices, and they laugh or whatever. It's not like I'm alone! Anyone who says they don't peruse the lesser parts of the internet, is probably lying.

It doesn't help that everything is being phonefied. Seriously, why are phones taking over as the dominant types of computers?  I only use mine if I'm bored or need to look something up when I'm away from my computer.

What do you expect? Smartphone shipments have exploded since 2009.

Most people I know don't use even 5% of their computer's power. They use it to briefly browse the web, watch some videos, send some emails...the basics. Smartphones do all of these things just as well, and they tie into other devices (such as TV's, smart home devices, cars, etc) much better than a desktop. So, do you spend $600 on a device that sits still, and is bulky, despite it not doing anything more than a phone for most people, or do you just get a damn smartphone, which does everything you need, in your pocket? It's a no-brainer for most.

For me? I just bought a $5100 custom-built laptop for rendering purposes (it's basically a mobile workstation) -- I, and those like me, still have a use for a laptop. And I enjoy typing on a keyboard, so I can appreciate a computer. But my use-case is very unusual, and if I didn't play computer games and use hard-core programs, I probably would use my phone for almost everything (since it does most everything beyond those aforementioned programs).

[hbelkins]

I don't use Incognito, even to browse you-know-what

I think you're the first person I've heard of who doesn't.  I also use incognito to bypass paywalls on news articles.

I haven't had any luck bypassing paywalls or article limits with incognito/private browsing on either Chrome or Firefox.

[jeffandnicole]

I don't use Incognito, even to browse you-know-what

I think you're the first person I've heard of who doesn't.  I also use incognito to bypass paywalls on news articles.

I haven't had any luck bypassing paywalls or article limits with incognito/private browsing on either Chrome or Firefox.

If the website has a limited number of articles you can view for free, incognito starts you anew every time.

[J N Winkler]

And yet, somehow, technology used to be designed for such cases.  Google could well add the additional functionality without impeding existing use cases.  That's what Microsoft used to do with Windows (prior to Windows 8).  For some reason, they're choosing to give those of us with less common use cases a lesser experience.  Seriously, what happened?  Apple used to be just one company, and now their philosophy has taken over just about everything.

What has happened is that the tech companies are chasing profit.  One way of doing this is to redesign interfaces to attract free-spending normies rather than miserly power users.  (I fall into the latter category since my Google Maps usage produces tons of API calls and I give Google nothing back because my ad-blocking HOSTS file blocks pay-per-click and my script traffic ignores UTM cookies.)  Another part of the profit pursuit is converting fixed items (some maintainable by subscription, some not) such as the hardware, the OS, and pay-only-once software programs into services that yield an ongoing revenue stream.  Windows 10 is "free" only in the sense that is relatively easy to get without a cash payment; you pay for it through the nose with unblockable ads that disrupt focus and consume eyeball time.

Not all of that profit goes to Wall Street portfolio capitalists.  A lot of tech CEOs believe our political system is not capable of meeting the challenges of income inequality on top of the demographic time bomb of the aging boomer generation.  So they invest in condos in missile silos (each of which costs millions of dollars) or property in New Zealand.

It doesn't help that everything is being phonefied.  Seriously, why are phones taking over as the dominant types of computers?  I only use mine if I'm bored or need to look something up when I'm away from my computer.  The screen size is too small and the less convenient interface resulting from not having a mouse (and not having a full-size or physical keyboard) means that you can't really do serious work on them.

Why buy a Bobcat when a traditional backhoe can do so much more?  Yet Bobcats not only are the norm on construction sites, but have also been shown to increase productivity.

Portable computers do not have to be fully capable to allow some forms of serious work to be done.  For example, when I travel, I find it much easier to keep a travel diary on my phone with a Bluetooth keyboard than I do with a laptop, and if I type the diary directly into Evernote, I also get three layers of backup--one on the phone, one on Evernote's servers, and one on my local hard drive back home since I have the Evernote desktop program installed specifically to access the command-line API that allows me to run a script every night to back up my entire Evernote note collection.

I also serve on the board of my local library.  A week before the monthly meeting, I receive an agenda packet that usually runs to about fifty pages.  I have elected to have it sent to me as a PDF rather than as a printout through the mail.  I bring it to the meeting on my phone so I can refer to it.

I go to the gym three times a week and often find myself having to fill recovery time between sets.  If I am up to date on the New Yorker (I subscribe to the print version), I often take my phone with me onto the gym floor to read signing plans.  Right now I am working my way through the signing plans for the Yamatogawa Route expressway segment that is currently under construction near Osaka.

Though I don't like to do it, owing to the additional steps required to maintain a local archive of my own work, I have used Gmail on my phone to put out fires.  One recent example involved taking care of a business detail just before 5 PM on a Friday when I was at the gym and not scheduled to come home (where I could have used Thunderbird on my laptop) until 6.30 PM at the earliest.

Yet, somehow, they're taking over as the dominant form of computing.  Apps are displacing both websites and real programs alike.  Heck, just look at Windows 8 - Microsoft fully intended on deprecating the desktop completely and moving everything to Metro (never mind that Metro was less sophisticated of an interface than even Windows 2.0); they had to backtrack when Metro flopped HARD (largely because the phone/tablet market was already cornered between the iPhone and Android).

I don't think Metro failed just because Android and iOS already had incumbency advantage.  Those two other OSes just work, while anything Microsoft produces (even for the non-PC market) is crash-prone.  And the killer hardware for Metro, such as flat touchscreen desktops, never took off.

And speaking of tablets, I can't really think of what the use case of them is.  They're too big to have the convenience of a phone and too small to do the serious work of a desktop or laptop.

Tablets are easier on older eyes.  While I use my phone in library board meetings, others who take agenda packets in PDF (such as our former president) use tablets.  Otherwise, they are well-suited for many types of work using Bluetooth peripherals, just as smartphones are.

I haven't had any luck bypassing paywalls or article limits with incognito/private browsing on either Chrome or Firefox.

If the website has a limited number of articles you can view for free, incognito starts you anew every time.

It depends on the news site and where it is in its process of shutting off paywall leakage.  Incognito mode used to work quite well with the Washington Post but now does so no longer because they use browser treatment of UTM cookies to determine whether you are trying to evade the paywall.  The only reliable way to access Post articles "incognito" I have found is to download them through wget, stripping UTM references from the URL string, and then load the downloaded local copy in the browser, which cannot access the JavaScript (hosted server-side, I think) that partially covers the article text with a sidebar and prevents you from scrolling to read it.  I still read the occasional New York Times article using incognito but the article counter still increments.  Meanwhile, if I go to the Wichita Eagle, any article linked off the normally loaded main page will load in incognito, but any link off that article will go to the paywall if an incognito load is attempted.

[ipeters61]

You risk losing it that way. Or having it stolen. At least with cloud backups, it's always there. And if the service ever gets shut down, you just download the files onto a drive and then upload it somewhere else. Not that I've heard of a service being shut down. If they did, the files would likely get turned over to another company, rather than just up and disappearing.

I'm very pro-cloud storage but Barracuda did shut down their Copy service a few years back: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/04/barracuda_kills_cudadrive_and_copy_cloud_storage_services/

That might not mean much to you but they were the only one (that I'm aware of) that had more storage than Dropbox from the get go and had native Linux support.

[vdeane]

What do you expect? Smartphone shipments have exploded since 2009.

Most people I know don't use even 5% of their computer's power. They use it to briefly browse the web, watch some videos, send some emails...the basics. Smartphones do all of these things just as well, and they tie into other devices (such as TV's, smart home devices, cars, etc) much better than a desktop. So, do you spend $600 on a device that sits still, and is bulky, despite it not doing anything more than a phone for most people, or do you just get a damn smartphone, which does everything you need, in your pocket? It's a no-brainer for most.

For me? I just bought a $5100 custom-built laptop for rendering purposes (it's basically a mobile workstation) -- I, and those like me, still have a use for a laptop. And I enjoy typing on a keyboard, so I can appreciate a computer. But my use-case is very unusual, and if I didn't play computer games and use hard-core programs, I probably would use my phone for almost everything (since it does most everything beyond those aforementioned programs).

Just because smartphones are everywhere doesn't mean other computers have to be turned into bigger versions of them.  As far as I'm concerned, they're two completely different devices, with different use cases.  I couldn't imagine even doing my primary web browsing on a phone or tablet.  Too small screen size, and the interface isn't as good with dealing with multiple tabs, and you don't have windows - everything is full screen.  I have a hard enough time having only a single monitor (alas, my desk doesn't really have room for a second) - it's hard to watch, say, a Roadwaywiz video at the same time as browsing here, for example.  I certainly couldn't compose the long an intricate replies with multiple quotes of parts of previous posts on a phone/tablet, either.  Much easier with a keyboard and especially a mouse (for selecting text).

I actually spent a bit more than that - getting something optimized for Linux isn't cheap, and I wanted something that could play Cities: Skylines.  Still, I'm hoping it will last a while, so I should get my money's worth.  My phone, meanwhile, was the cheapest thing I could get that wasn't refurbished.

It depends on the news site and where it is in its process of shutting off paywall leakage.  Incognito mode used to work quite well with the Washington Post but now does so no longer because they use browser treatment of UTM cookies to determine whether you are trying to evade the paywall.  The only reliable way to access Post articles "incognito" I have found is to download them through wget, stripping UTM references from the URL string, and then load the downloaded local copy in the browser, which cannot access the JavaScript (hosted server-side, I think) that partially covers the article text with a sidebar and prevents you from scrolling to read it.  I still read the occasional New York Times article using incognito but the article counter still increments.  Meanwhile, if I go to the Wichita Eagle, any article linked off the normally loaded main page will load in incognito, but any link off that article will go to the paywall if an incognito load is attempted.

Interesting... I haven't had that problem with Washington Post.  Its article count seems to reset every time.  I'd say Adblock Plus, but I actually have it disabled on Washington Post.  Maybe the fact that I block third party cookies?

[Rothman]

I use incognito and look at a bunch of articles on the Post and the Times daily.  I have yet to hit a limit when using incognito.

[jakeroot]

What do you expect? Smartphone shipments have exploded since 2009.

Most people I know don't use even 5% of their computer's power. They use it to briefly browse the web, watch some videos, send some emails...the basics. Smartphones do all of these things just as well, and they tie into other devices (such as TV's, smart home devices, cars, etc) much better than a desktop. So, do you spend $600 on a device that sits still, and is bulky, despite it not doing anything more than a phone for most people, or do you just get a damn smartphone, which does everything you need, in your pocket? It's a no-brainer for most.

For me? I just bought a $5100 custom-built laptop for rendering purposes (it's basically a mobile workstation) -- I, and those like me, still have a use for a laptop. And I enjoy typing on a keyboard, so I can appreciate a computer. But my use-case is very unusual, and if I didn't play computer games and use hard-core programs, I probably would use my phone for almost everything (since it does most everything beyond those aforementioned programs).

Just because smartphones are everywhere doesn't mean other computers have to be turned into bigger versions of them.  As far as I'm concerned, they're two completely different devices, with different use cases.  I couldn't imagine even doing my primary web browsing on a phone or tablet.  Too small screen size, and the interface isn't as good with dealing with multiple tabs, and you don't have windows - everything is full screen.  I have a hard enough time having only a single monitor (alas, my desk doesn't really have room for a second) - it's hard to watch, say, a Roadwaywiz video at the same time as browsing here, for example.  I certainly couldn't compose the long an intricate replies with multiple quotes of parts of previous posts on a phone/tablet, either.  Much easier with a keyboard and especially a mouse (for selecting text).

They are definitely two different devices, but they do very similar things on the basic level. It's the more complex tasks where they differ (obviously). In defence of mobile web browsing, apps are generally taking the place of general perusing, so usage of mobile browsers has limited importance. A lot of users here (definitely not me) seem to use the Tapatalk app, if that means anything.

Modern tablets have multi-window support. Hell, my Galaxy S8+ has multi-window support. It's two small windows, but it's technically multi window.

Also, modern phones have giant screens. Not tablet or computer size, but damn big compared to ten years ago.

I actually spent a bit more than that - getting something optimized for Linux isn't cheap, and I wanted something that could play Cities: Skylines.  Still, I'm hoping it will last a while, so I should get my money's worth.  My phone, meanwhile, was the cheapest thing I could get that wasn't refurbished.

I have a feeling I'm wasting my time, if I'm talking to someone who spent $5k+ on a computer. We are not normal!

[MNHighwayMan]

They are definitely two different devices, but they do very similar things on the basic level. It's the more complex tasks where they differ (obviously). In defence of mobile web browsing, apps are generally taking the place of general perusing, so usage of mobile browsers has limited importance. A lot of users here (definitely not me) seem to use the Tapatalk app, if that means anything.

I browse and comment on this forum perfectly fine in Chrome for Android on my GS7. The only thing that sucks, which someone previously mentioned, is parsing quotes using the mobile cursor, and I'm not sure the Tapatalk app would help with that issue.

[vdeane]

Honestly, I find browsing the forum on the phone to be cumbersome.  You need to zoom in and pan all around the screen, since the forum software doesn't have a mobile stylesheet.  Ignoring that, it would still be cumbersome for me since I tend to read everything in batches; most people seem to browse a bit here and there, or focus on views like "replies to your posts" or something like that, which would probably be easier than systemically searching out every thread with new posts and reading the ones in interesting threads verbatim.

They are definitely two different devices, but they do very similar things on the basic level. It's the more complex tasks where they differ (obviously). In defence of mobile web browsing, apps are generally taking the place of general perusing, so usage of mobile browsers has limited importance. A lot of users here (definitely not me) seem to use the Tapatalk app, if that means anything.

Yeah, I never quite understood the whole app craze, at least not from the user's point of view (developers like them because of advertising, notifications, and being able to scoop up more user data).  Most mobile sites are fine.  Facebook stands out to me - the app is HUGE and tends to do rather intensive spying on users.  The latter would prevent me from installing it even if my phone had room to actually install apps, which is doesn't.  It's amazing how Android phones come pre-loaded with so much junk that there's no room for users to add anything, and the bloat only gets worse over time (it's far, far worse than Windows ever was; it used to have over a gigabyte of internal storage free, but now I'm lucky if I can squeeze out 400 megabytes!).  My phone is to the point where I have to clear the cache multiple times per day and keep automatic updates disabled, and it's only two years old, and pictures/music are already on the micro SD card.

[silverback1065]

it doesn't suck anymore, this topic is unneeded

[hotdogPi]

it doesn't suck anymore, this topic is unneeded

Until they change it again.

[empirestate]

OK, I just this minute re-loaded Google Maps, and suddenly it wasn't on Mercator projection anymore. I zoomed it out, and it's on a globe.

[J N Winkler]

OK, I just this minute re-loaded Google Maps, and suddenly it wasn't on Mercator projection anymore. I zoomed it out, and it's on a globe.

Same here, and with search on a specific location (I tried Moscow), there appears to be a second load (screen redraws) to convert from Mercator to whatever projection Maps is using for less-than-full-globe views (Robinson?).

My phone, meanwhile, was the cheapest thing I could get that wasn't refurbished.

I have found bargain basement is not the way to go, even for something that is not being used as a primary IT device.  My first phone was an entry-level Droid Razr M, acquired through my phone provider via a two-year plan with no supplemental charge.  It turned out not to have enough hardware capacity (not sure whether memory or CPU) to handle GPS recording reliably without daily rebooting, and after two years I was happy to decommission it.  My current phone is a Droid Turbo, phone plan + $200 supplementary charge, and it has been robust enough to handle everything I have thrown at it over four years, though the screen now shows noticeable burn-in from the status line and battery life is a lot shorter.

Interesting... I haven't had that problem with Washington Post.  Its article count seems to reset every time.  I'd say Adblock Plus, but I actually have it disabled on Washington Post.  Maybe the fact that I block third party cookies?

I have disabled third-party cookies (I am on Firefox 48.0) and am now trying the Post every so often to see if I get redirected to the subscription page.  I still get a blue banner on the side to prompt me to disable tracking protection since I haven't configured Firefox to load new incognito windows with tracking protection disabled by default.

[Stephane Dumas]

ACME mapper switched from Google maps to Leaflet.js . http://acme.com/updates/archive/204.html

Now if only Bing's Steetside do cover Canada....

[jakeroot]

OK, I just this minute re-loaded Google Maps, and suddenly it wasn't on Mercator projection anymore. I zoomed it out, and it's on a globe.

Wonder what took them so long. The world isn't flat.

The only reason flat maps exist was because spherical projection wasn't always an option. As far as I know.

[MNHighwayMan]

OK, I just this minute re-loaded Google Maps, and suddenly it wasn't on Mercator projection anymore. I zoomed it out, and it's on a globe.

Wonder what took them so long. The world isn't flat.

Gotta be able to develop the technology to be able to browse a virtual globe first. It's not a simple task, either in terms of tech, or in terms of having enough data to make it work. I remember when I first discovered Google Earth, nearly around the time it first came out, and thinking about how awesome it was, despite all the mismatched (and low resolution) aerial imagery that was often misaligned by several feet on the edges, among other issues.

[jakeroot]

OK, I just this minute re-loaded Google Maps, and suddenly it wasn't on Mercator projection anymore. I zoomed it out, and it's on a globe.

Wonder what took them so long. The world isn't flat.

Gotta be able to develop the technology to be able to browse a virtual globe first. It's not a simple task, either in terms of tech, or in terms of having enough data to make it work. I remember when I first discovered Google Earth, nearly around the time it first came out, and thinking about how awesome it was, despite all the mismatched (and low resolution) aerial imagery that was often misaligned by several feet on the edges, among other issues.

It's true that a satellite-overlaid spherical earth is not perfect, but a spherical earth with a map overlay should be much easier, since it's just placing lines on a sphere. 3D mode on Google Maps' website has allowed users to zoom out and spin around a 3D globe for several years now (with a map overlay, no less), so it was just a matter of disabling the satellite imagery, me thinks.

[doorknob60]

While the logic in moving Google Maps to a globe is sound and makes sense, I don't like it. Good news is, it's optional. Click the hamburger menu on the top left, then click Globe, and it will toggle it off.

[empirestate]

For more fun, switch to "satellite" in Globe mode, then zoom way, way out. :-)

[jakeroot]

While the logic in moving Google Maps to a globe is sound and makes sense, I don't like it. Good news is, it's optional. Click the hamburger menu on the top left, then click Globe, and it will toggle it off.

Sound and sensical...still there are those that just don't like it. I really don't get it.

For more fun, switch to "satellite" in Globe mode, then zoom way, way out. :-)

Nice, I hadn't noticed that feature before! Always wanted to explore Mars.