Google Maps New Look

[empirestate]

By the way, the highlighting of cities in your search results has returned...

[Michael]

It would be awesome if they actually used the standard design for state and provincial routes rather than ovals and home plates, but I've yet to see anyone but a state DOT or a roadgeek produce such.

I've seen the occasional commercial paper map with the actual shield shapes (e.g. ACSC if I remember correctly).

Map Works (based in Rochester, NY) uses proper shields for the states they make maps for (NY, and parts of PA and CT).  In New York, (I don't know about PA and CT) AAA uses Maps Works maps with AAA branding.  Here's an online version of the Monroe County map.

As for Google Maps, I think the old US shields are more accurate, and, like most others here, think the new exit numbers are hard to read.

[Alps]

There's another new look to Google Maps lately. Seems to be more terrain in the default view, including coloration of brown and green. But just now I discovered the best feature - while trying to locate a one-lane bridge, I found that zoomed in sufficiently, waterway names are appearing! I used to have to go to USGS topo maps to find names, which wasn't always successful. Now all I ask is for mountain range names, and then I'm totally set.

[MDOTFanFB]

And there's yet another new look to Google Maps: in some metropolitan areas, including Detroit, the footprints of every building are now appearing! They appear to have been traced over the aerial imagery. Though there may be inaccuracies, I bet that it will be useful for finding where your house appears in relation to the nearby buildings.

[empirestate]

There's another new look to Google Maps lately. Seems to be more terrain in the default view, including coloration of brown and green. But just now I discovered the best feature - while trying to locate a one-lane bridge, I found that zoomed in sufficiently, waterway names are appearing! I used to have to go to USGS topo maps to find names, which wasn't always successful. Now all I ask is for mountain range names, and then I'm totally set.

Also, shaded relief now appears in low-to-mid zoom levels (it's only apparent in areas of high relief, however). Alaska now makes much more sense!

And there's yet another new look to Google Maps: in some metropolitan areas, including Detroit, the footprints of every building are now appearing! They appear to have been traced over the aerial imagery. Though there may be inaccuracies, I bet that it will be useful for finding where your house appears in relation to the nearby buildings.

The buildings have been around for a while now; the current set is largely compiled from the 3D warehouse models, such as you see in Google Earth.

[vdeane]

For me the shaded relief appears on mid-to-high zooms; not at the low ones.

[empirestate]

For me the shaded relief appears on mid-to-high zooms; not at the low ones.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say it's our terminology that's backwards, not our browsing experience.

Low-to-mid as in relative scale (if said scale were expressed as a fraction), or more obviously, position of the zoom slider.

Mid-to-high if expressed in terms of apparent altitude.

[Some_Person]

Instead of making a new thread, I'm just gonna post here and say that the Allentown, PA area has just recently (within 24 hours) been given 45º imagery all throughout the area.

Hopefully a lot more places did as well, although if it was my decision, I'd prefer the super HD street view in the area, like this is just amazing: http://goo.gl/maps/ZIDhy
Especially compared to places like http://goo.gl/maps/5JtKK where signs are unreadable

[deathtopumpkins]

Here's a full list of places that got new imagery in the update Some_Person mentioned:
http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2012/11/imagery-update-tour-sites-around-world.html

[Billy F 1988]

I hardly use Google Maps regardless of the makeup the corporate possy changed. Half the time, Google's wrong anyway. Like for MT Secondary 210, they mark that as US 210, but it's clear over on the other side of the state near Yellowstone! I'm not too impressed with it. Google just wants to slapdash things just to confuse people even moreso than they did with the previous version.

Their Map Maker feature sucks worse. So, pretty much, Bing is what I use. They're not right completely, but they're not completely half-wrong like Google Maps.

[empirestate]

Instead of making a new thread, I'm just gonna post here and say that the Allentown, PA area has just recently (within 24 hours) been given 45º imagery all throughout the area.

Hopefully a lot more places did as well, although if it was my decision, I'd prefer the super HD street view in the area, like this is just amazing: http://goo.gl/maps/ZIDhy
Especially compared to places like http://goo.gl/maps/5JtKK where signs are unreadable

They've been pretty aggressively pursuing oblique imagery to incorporate in Google Earth (already done, though limited) and to compete with the likes of C3 technologies (ex-Nokia, now Apple...how that turned out) and to generally make strides beyond their existing user-created 3D Warehouse environment. Of course, Bing–er, Microsoft, had it the whole time with Bird's Eye, which is now ironically most useful as a historical tool!

Google will do pretty will with it, I predict...it will still have the pitfalls of uninterpreted data, but they seem to build that onto a pretty good base technologically (compare Street View with competing products like Bing's Streetside).

[NE2]

Like for MT Secondary 210, they mark that as US 210, but it's clear over on the other side of the state near Yellowstone!

???

[Alps]

Like for MT Secondary 210, they mark that as US 210, but it's clear over on the other side of the state near Yellowstone!

???

Yeah, some sort of link would be helpful for that.
The response "???" is unacceptable. Please add content with your posts. Underline what you're questioning, or write it out.

[NE2]

I snipped the post to the sentence I'm questioning. There's no US 210.

[Roadsguy]

Speaking of new satellite view, Google finally updated the satellite view of Reading, Harrisburg, and in that huge general area in central PA. It was so old that it showed the US 222 freeway still under construction southwest of Reading, and that's been done for years!

[kphoger]

Half the time, Google's wrong anyway.*
[. . .]
completely half-wrong like Google Maps.*

* Rounding may have been used.

[national highway 1]

Like for MT Secondary 210, they mark that as US 210, but it's clear over on the other side of the state near Yellowstone!

???

Yeah, some sort of link would be helpful for that.
The response "???" is unacceptable. Please add content with your posts. Underline what you're questioning, or write it out.

I snipped the post to the sentence I'm questioning. There's no US 210.

I'm pretty sure that Billy meant US 310 which runs from I-90 at Laurel MT to US 14/16/20 at Greybull WY. 

[Billy F 1988]

To clear the confusion, here's what I meant about US 210 being incorrectly marked.



Yes, that is NOT US 210. US 210 is the Carlton to Motley, MN route. Google thought this was US 210. It's Montana Secondary 210, a route that starts at Montana 200 in Bonner/Milltown and ends east of Turah.

[MVHighways]

Instead of making a new thread, I'm just gonna post here and say that the Allentown, PA area has just recently (within 24 hours) been given 45º imagery all throughout the area.

Hopefully a lot more places did as well, although if it was my decision, I'd prefer the super HD street view in the area, like this is just amazing: http://goo.gl/maps/ZIDhy
Especially compared to places like http://goo.gl/maps/5JtKK where signs are unreadable

Mine got it a week ago.

[Alps]

To clear the confusion, here's what I meant about US 210 being incorrectly marked.



Yes, that is NOT US 210. US 210 is the Carlton to Motley, MN route. Google thought this was US 210. It's Montana Secondary 210, a route that starts at Montana 200 in Bonner/Milltown and ends east of Turah.

Jesus Christ, what does it take to get a damn link around here?
It's just a case of taking the current route number and putting it in the shield of the former designation (US 12). Meanwhile, anyone think to report this to Google?

[Billy F 1988]

Okay! Nevermind, then! Friggin' A, dude! I was trying to clear the confusion but, screw it! It's worse now! Probably should have made those observations about US 210 incorrectly marked in "Incorrect highways marked on Google Maps"! Damn! Don't come blowing up on me, cause I already did, and I'm sorry!

[Alps]

Okay! Nevermind, then! Friggin' A, dude! I was trying to clear the confusion but, screw it! It's worse now! Probably should have made those observations about US 210 incorrectly marked in "Incorrect highways marked on Google Maps"! Damn! Don't come blowing up on me, cause I already did, and I'm sorry!

My response was somewhat sarcastic - of course that never comes across on the Internet. I'm not actually angry/upset.

[Duke87]

Google's implementation is not as harsh as Bing's, but the perspective of the angled imagery still doesn't work properly when panning, which is bothersome.

As you pan "up", the bottom of the image should appear to move towards you if the perspective were done properly.

This is doable, but it would require texture mapping, which is not compatible with Google Maps' current method of loading image tiles.

Google Earth does it, though!