Google Maps is much better as a navigator than as a map. It can tell you how to get to the specific location you are interested in, but it doesn't give you a good overview of the area.
It doesn't show you as much detail as it could. The color scheme has a poor contrast. The colored zones are ambiguous and often misleading. You see a random-looking sample of points of interest rather than a consistent listing of every single location of a certain category and significance. Major roads and streets are easy to see, while railroads fade into the background. And sometimes you can see major bridges only by zooming in, as Google Maps thinks they must be insignificant because you can't drive over them.
> Google Maps is much better as a navigator than as a map.
This is true specifically for cars and maybe mass transit. But for navigating on foot or bicycle, OSM is much better. OSM tells me where water fountains and park benches are, and has far more trails marked. Google Maps excels at leading people to places they might spend money, and is mediocre at most anything else.
It doesn't show you as much detail as it could. The color scheme has a poor contrast. The colored zones are ambiguous and often misleading. You see a random-looking sample of points of interest rather than a consistent listing of every single location of a certain category and significance. Major roads and streets are easy to see, while railroads fade into the background. And sometimes you can see major bridges only by zooming in, as Google Maps thinks they must be insignificant because you can't drive over them.