| Sorry, but this is a strange article. Not sure what the reader should learn from it. > However, while OSM’s open, collaborative nature is a major strength, the quality and accuracy of its data still lag behind proprietary services like Google Maps. Such a general statement is wrong. For car routes maybe. But even for POIs I have found that OSM catches up fast. But Google Maps has definitely not the best quality for outdoor routes (like walking, hiking and biking). And this is not just my personal opinion. > These pipelines, which process and format the data appropriately, are typically only feasible for large companies. No, this is wrong. Already smaller companies can handle these pipelines. Furthermore there are many companies that offer OSM data as a SaaS (routing, geocoding and/or maps) > they are largely ineffective without access to the latest and most accurate map data. 'largely ineffective' is misleading here. OSM is already sufficiently precise atm (ofc depending on your needs). Sure, you do not have live traffic, but there are already many (Uber-like) companies that use OSM and enhance them with their own data. And also there are a few options to buy live traffic for OSM data. > Therefore, currently, their best option is to utilize Google's APIs From my experience many customers find them too expensive especially for the ride-hailing use case OP describes. |