

Foursquare is joining the OpenStreetMap movement - state_machine
http://blog.foursquare.com/2012/02/29/foursquare-is-joining-the-openstreetmap-movement-say-hi-to-pretty-new-maps/

======
51Cards
While I like the concept of the open maps idea and I'm sure it has a bright
future, what about aerial views, street view, etc? Is this not a functionality
step backwards for FourSquare hopping on such a new service at this point?

The biggest problem I see with MapBox right now is that their map labels don't
seem to be dynamic. There are a lot of places around my house I can zoom in
and I have to pan to see the street name because the label is out of view.
There is one location nearby where I can scroll 3/4 the way across town and
not see a label on one particularly major street. This could quickly make for
a frustrating user experience.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud what MapBox is putting together and I'm sure
it'll improve rapidly. At this point though it does seem like a significant
drop in functionality for a major service to move onto it.

~~~
tmcw
> The biggest problem I see with MapBox right now is that their map labels
> don't seem to be dynamic.

As far as I know, there's only one map where labels _are_ dynamic - Google
MapsGL, and it's available only on 10% of browsers.

> While I like the concept of the open maps idea and I'm sure it has a bright
> future, what about aerial views, street view, etc? Is this not a
> functionality step backwards for FourSquare hopping on such a new service at
> this point?

FourSquare wasn't using street view, but the satellite imagery void is
definitely something to address.

~~~
abraham
Based on the system requirements MapsGL should be available much more than 10%
of browser. WCIU... pegs "partial" WebGL support at 46%. Evan if you remove a
generous % for lack of hardware support you are still significantly over 10%.

[http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answe...](http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1630790)
<http://caniuse.com/#search=webgl>

------
malandrew
What about contributing the Venues to an open places database? AFAIK
Foursquare is one of the only companies in the Factual Crosswalk API that is
included but not an active cooperative partner.

~~~
malandrew
I noticed that all comments on HN and on the blog post that addressed the
issue of venue data were conveniently dodged.

This is unfortunate and reflects badly on FourSquare since it is highly
indicative that this decision is almost certainly about the money being paid
to Google for its API and not at all about supporting open-source.

It appears that FourSquare is happy taking what it wants from the commons
generated by the community, but when it has an asset that would greatly
benefit the commons, and that they don't necessarily need to hold close to
their chest to maintain an advantage, that they don't donate it.

To me, that's a shame.

The whole world would clearly be better off if one of the Place API providers
with a solid collection of POI internationally (Google and Foursquare) were to
donate that set to the commons.

It's great that the commons gains another major supporter, but near as I can
tell Foursquare is just using information in the commons to its advantage here
without truly participating in the commons.

------
rxin
I wonder whether this is related to recent introduction of leaderboards in
Google Latitude check-ins.

~~~
jorgeortiz85
Payback's a bitch.

[Disclaimer: These are my personal views and do not represent those of my
employer, foursquare.]

Really though, the new Google Maps pricing scheme is just totally bonkers.
They're trying to charge a higher CPM than typical AdSense rates. It's just
nonsense.

