[belter]

As the owner of several TomTom devices, who tried a smartphone and google maps as an alternative, my experience is that the maps are of higher quality and the navigation recommendations better.

Multiple times, when in a Taxi in a foreign country, that used the usual solution of smartphone and Google maps, managed to get on time and find a tricky destination by popping up my trusted TomTom.

[snarf21]

Navigation is all about the DATA. If it worked better (or worse) in a certain location, it is solely because they have access to quality data. Quality data costs a lot. Companies like NavTech used to literally drive cars down the road (think Google street view cards) and capturing everything (speed limit, number of lanes, boundaries, etc.) but they were bought by Nokia a long time ago. Not sure what is what these days. You can get pretty good data these days by leveraging free government data and things like OpenStreetMap. Routing is quite simple with good data. The harder part is conversion to narrative directions. How many times have you been given instructions to "continue to stay on XX for 500 feet" only to be told to "stay straight to continue on XX"? (Source: Worked for MapQuest for many years)

[drno123]

The main competitor to NavTech was TeleAtlas, that was acquired by TomTom.

[maxerickson]

Nokia's map group spun out into Here, which is owned by a group of EU automakers.

[daniel_iversen]

I really liked how TomTom's voice navigation was a lot more "vocal"/directive than Google, and for me that was a real benefit (maybe its niche, but they were at least differentiated there) but then some years ago (when they changed to a subscription service AFAIR) they changed the software and it was no longer "easier" to navigate with than Google (who had lots of other benefits incl. being free). Wonder if they have some sort of niche benefits as a navigation device now? Offline maps was good but Google's had that for a long time too.. Also, isn't Google and Apple Maps location tracking much more accurate in cities than TomTom devices because they don't just use GPS but also use cell tower triangulation as well as nearby wifi hotspot detection? And do people know (from their annual report) how much revenue comes from devices vs. licensing maps? (I'm sure device sales are close to non-existent compared to licensing deals)

[TedDoesntTalk]

> they don't just use GPS but also use cell tower triangulation as well as nearby wifi hotspot detection?

Presumably the TomTom phone apps do the same. Yes, they have phone apps not just stand alone devices.

[tluyben2]

Guess it depends on the location? We used it to drive through rural Canada and if we had followed any of the many wrong ways it tried to send us, we would be very dead.

[fumeux_fume]

I have TomTom as the built in nav for my car (2021 model). It's awful compared to Google maps and we live in a highly urbanized area so maybe it's just bad in general. Seeing the company's continual decline comports with my experience with their main product.

[asddubs]

yup, I still use one too. it's great, way better than google maps. But I'm guessing it's a hard pitch to get people to even try a dedicated device for something they already have in their pocket, for free.

[andsoitis]

"the best camera is the one that's with you” － Chase Jarvis

[hulitu]

Until you use it and then realise that the picture you took with it is unusable.

[mistrial9]

> is that the maps are of higher quality and the navigation recommendations better.

to be clear here, for all readers.. you mean TomTom maps are higher quality? in what region? rural, urban or ? thx

[gadders]

I won't buy another TomTom device, but I pay the ~£20/yearly fee for the mobile phone version because the maps are so much better than Google Maps and don't need an always-on data connection.

[hef19898]

The free TomTom android app is great! Cannot recommend enough.