[y04nn]

The quality of the maps is getting better, much more useful and detailed than Google Maps. I find it much easier to locate myself on Organic Maps than Google Maps. For example parks are only a green blob on Google Maps, while benches, walking paths, drinking water points, toilets and other landmarks and buildings are visible on Organic Maps. I find that adding transit lines or cycling routes as an overlay is also a great feature. Even the search feature is getting broken on Google Maps, when making a search, it would show up advertised results (in red squares instead of red circles) and when browsing the map there are more advertised useless places surrounded by an almost empty map. The only advantage of Google Map is to find the best way from point A to point B and places reviews.

[kqr]

I often reference this comparison in this context: https://i.xkqr.org/gmapsvsosm.png

[Doohickey-d]

It's often more nuanced than that IMO.

OSM in my experience is better at features (roads, hiking trails, and stuff like that), i.e. what's shown in that comparison screenshot.

Google Maps is better at place-metadata, such as opening hours; as well as user-contributed content like reviews and photos.

So I end up using both, depending on usecase.

[kqr]

Indeed. OpenStreetMap is the better map, Google Maps is the better address book and business directory.

[Tmpod]

That's OSM Carto[1] on the bottom, the default renderer/style on osm.org, but there are many alternative ones too. For example, Maptiler[2] has a bunch of cleaner styles, closer to Google's, yet with greater detail. Here is a basic one used my OSMApp[3] for that place as well: https://i.ibb.co/7dD05Ldp/Captura-de-ecr-20260706-092411.png

[1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap_Carto [2]: https://www.maptiler.com [3]: https:/osmapp.org

[nobody42]

"There's no life where data broker isn't needed"

[ale42]

In some places it always was better (it's OpenStreetMap data) e.g. in the Puna de Atacama desert in Argentina/Chile, Google Maps is years behind in therms of map precision. Lots of roads are missing from Google Maps. Plus, OrganicMaps working totally offline, it's perfect for such a place where the only Internet would be by satellite.

[usrusr]

One is an ad medium, the other isn't.

But it really depends not only on the presentation theme but also on the data set itself and that varies by region. I'm sure that there are still places where the sources Google is buying are better than whatever is on OSM, just like there are regions where OSM is just so much more detailed than everybody else. And yet others, where OSM is generously fed by an entity that also supplies Google and all the others because they are not doing it for the map, they are doing it for the place.

[kqr]

The great thing about OSM is that if an area someone cares about is sparsely covered, that's a self-solving problem. There are parts of the world with great detail in OSM only because I happen to care about them.

[NoImmatureAdHom]

When you realize that Google Maps is a business directory that also happens to do mapping, things make sense.