Microsoft beats Google in Gizmodo mobile maps shootout

by on November 30, 2006

It’s funny, a friend told me Microsoft couldn’t innovate anymore and that Google was going to eat its lunch.

Oh, yeah?

Gizmodo held a Microsoft vs. Google mobile map shootout.

Love this quote: “So which is better? Without a doubt, Microsoft’s was the winner.”

  • Anonymous
    They say it supports J2ME phones, yet it doesn't work on my BlackBerry. The application downloads and installs fine. When I launch the app, I can type information into the search bar, but that's about it.

    I can't navigate to the "GO" or "MENU" buttons and the only option in the menu when I click the jog-wheel is "Close". Additionally, deleting entered text doesn't work. In a nutshell, the app is completely unusable for me.

    Makes me wonder, did they even bother testing this app on a variety of J2ME phones? I mean, BlackBerry is a pretty big brand for them to miss.

    Anyway, because the app doesn't work, Google wins by default. And Gizmodo is wrong - Google Maps does indeed have directions and traffic (U.S. only). I wonder what version of Google Maps they were trying.
  • robo74
    What wasn't mentioned is the nice GPS feature. This truly rocks. If you are running one of the HP Ipaq phones with GPS it gives you the option of adding your location. NICE!
  • Oh cool. I tried this out today, but didn't know it works w/ GPS. I've got the Cingular 3125 and have a bluetooth GPS to go with it. I hope it works!
  • I'm really impressed with WLS, installed on my MDA. It's incredibly fast, even when I was on a weak connection. Installation and use are as simple as can be. More more more!
  • robo74
    Toby let us know if it works. I'm curious on that one too.
  • I have mixed feelings on this shootout - first, it's not really a shootout, they are comparing a native Windows Mobile app with a J2ME one, which is not fair at all. The overhead of the virtual machine will of course slow down an equivalent application.

    If Google made a native application, I bet it would run just as smooth, with a much improved UI (the J2ME UI sucks).

    Besides the software itself, much has to be said about the two services. Google, for some reason, allows for searching UK addresses and postcodes on their map service, but not through their API, apparently because the UK postal service own the copyright to them...yeah, makes your brain go funny right?

    Virtual Earth has a more complete dataset, covering places like Romania, which in Google Maps is a barren land.

    Searching for addresses outside the US sucks on Virtual Earth, and makes it virtually unusable. The zip codes are all messed up, as addresses are totally messed up and mangled, resulting in the map zooming to the wrong locations. Google wins hands-down on this one.

    What all these apps relly need is the ability to select, download and cache selected areas of the map, to be able to browse and navigate offline. If you plan a route, it would make sense to download the map detail for it, to spare you from keeping a data connection open during the whole trip.
  • robo74: It works great!

    I have the GPS that comes with Pocket Streets and then got a bluetooth dock for it so it doesn't need any cables. If you get that far, the rest is a simple.

    It maps current location and you can get direction from wherever you are (exactly wherever you are) to whatever destination, either by selecting it on the map, or by entering in and searching for the destination like we've all done before.

    Cools stuff! I'm probably post more about it on my blog after I try it out some more.
  • robo74
    Excellent. I have been trying it out with my IPAQ with the built-in GPS and it definitely does the trick. No complaints here.
  • fairly, google is new in the gadget scene and wl just wait for a year or two. this isnt an all-time award right? :)
  • hani
    Hi..

    I think googel have more world coverage than microsoft ..
  • It's like comparing General Electric with American Express. Their areas of expertise are very different. Google is a search company and does that pretty well, whereas Microsoft is a software company which it does pretty well.

    Apple on the other hand is an industrial design and marketing company which it does brilliantly. But would you use an Apple search engine?

    Why is it that Apple have never tried the search market? I guess you could punch is your birth date and then get search results based on your typing speed and biorhythms :)
blog comments powered by Disqus