Re:Google Maps updates 'dangerous' Ben Nevis route
by raspyberr on Saturday July 17, 2021 @03:53PM
(#27868304)
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say or compare or even why. "Mobile phone" online maps often have completely blank areas in wild areas whilst a specific "paper" map for that area is rich in detail. If you're going hiking, you'd take both a paper map for the area because it's more likely to be accurate AND you'd take a phone because GPS and being able to call for help is useful.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Google Maps updates 'dangerous' Ben Nevis route
by ghaff on Saturday July 17, 2021 @04:10PM
(#27868420)
And even calling for help can be marginal. Not that it's a panacea but if you're really concerned about always (usually) being able to call for help, you probably should have a personal locator beacon.
There is a shift in attitude though. I was having an online discussion with someone who basically said they'd be terrified if they couldn't call for help and, for me, that's the default assumption if I'm away from civilization.
Re:Google Maps updates 'dangerous' Ben Nevis route
by spaetzleesser on Saturday July 17, 2021 @04:31PM
(#27868589)
What paper maps are out there that are more precise than what you can find on gaiagps or openstreetmaps?
Re:Google Maps updates 'dangerous' Ben Nevis route
by ghaff on Saturday July 17, 2021 @04:55PM
(#27868795)
Around where I live (in Massachusetts) there are a ton of local parks and forests that have trails on their paper maps/websites that aren't on OSM--although it's gotten pretty good. (And, in fact, there are some unofficial trails on OSM that aren't on published maps. In the UK my experience is that the OS maps are often better than OSM in a variety of ways.
Re:Google Maps updates 'dangerous' Ben Nevis route
by renewiltord on Saturday July 17, 2021 @04:10PM
(#27868424)
It’s the UK. You have apps on your phone with the Ordnance Survey maps.