Tesla: please use Google Maps for traffic-based navigation

[tomas]

Dial it back to 2012. No cars shipping with Internet access. All nav systems using on board maps. No market proof consumers will pay for Internet subscription for car. Wifi and wireless costs 3x today's price. Tesla planning to offer only 90 days free. Google maps very immature. Waze barely exists. Choice of onboard maps obvious.

fact that your phone does better today. Ok, but can your phone drive you anywhere? This is not an oversight by tesla, just a demonstration of how fast technology evolves.

 

[Duckjybe]

+1 to the OP

nobody, and i mean nobody will come close to google maps when it comes to the quality of what they offer

just ask apple.

even if it means ceding control a bit to google, at least it wont drive their model S customers to mud roads....

In some areas Apple maps traffic is superior to Googles so I like it better. North of Barrie Google never displays traffic whereby Apple maps does!

 

[David99]

Tesla's weird double navigation sucks. Very often I get different routes on the center screen than in the driver screen. Sometimes one gets stuck. The route is often not ideal. It is unaware of major, year long road closures due to constructions. (It constantly wants me to take a road that has been close for over a year). It sometimes directs me off a major road that is perfectly free, to a side road with several stop signs only to go back to the main road 3 miles down, thus wasting time and energy. The search sucks. Here is a simple example of searching for 'post office' in Anaheim, CA. It found something in India, Africa and Europe. WTF?

I use Waze all the time and it works so much better. Tesla really dropped the ball on navigation.

 

[tomas]

Tesla's weird double navigation sucks.

I use Waze all the time and it works so much better. Tesla really dropped the ball on navigation.

Sigh... Read my post above. Cars use stored maps because they need constant connectivity. You'd REALLY complain if maps dropped out if you didn't have internet access. So, you cannot compare maps on a car vs. maps on a mobile device that is internet connected... the latter has FLOWN past the former in capability in last 3 years since Tesla Model S design had to be frozen.

Now, I think you are complaining about fact that Tesla offers BOTH google maps and nav maps and there are sometimes conflicts. OK..., so should they pull the Google maps and be like every other car designed in 2012 or before? Just stored maps? That you pay a subscription for? You can complain if you don't like Tesla's stored maps solution - that you think it is inaccurate. Or that you don't like the search, which I believe is all google. But do not compare a car nav to a connected device nav, it is not right.

Now, there may be cars shipping now that have 4g (with a subscription cost), and google maps/nav... I'm so happy with my S I don't shop much. But the MS is the ONLY car on the market that is likely to offer what you want at some point to ALL owners with minimal upgrade cost (probably just 4g radio). So "dropped the ball" is kinda harsh in view of automotive state of the art.

 

[bob_p]

At a minimum, Tesla could provide quarterly updates to the maps - so that the latest available Garmin/Navigon maps were being used. Those maps are still out-of-date when they're distributed, but at least the maps would be closer to the Google maps - which are usually pretty accurate. [I live in a new housing development, with new streets opening periodically, and the Google maps quickly show the new streets.]

Even better would be for the navigation software to use the same Google maps. Unlike the Garmin database which probably provides very large regions, the Google maps could be stored locally within a reasonable range of the car (400 to 500 miles), which should cover almost all navigation routes. And, if a car was on a long trip, if there was WiFi at the superchargers, the maps could be updated while cars were charging.

 

[Gizmotoy]

At a minimum, Tesla could provide quarterly updates to the maps - so that the latest available Garmin/Navigon maps were being used. Those maps are still out-of-date when they're distributed, but at least the maps would be closer to the Google maps - which are usually pretty accurate. [I live in a new housing development, with new streets opening periodically, and the Google maps quickly show the new streets.]

I wish. They did promise yearly updates, but that's not been handled well, IMO. You need WiFi to get the maps, and the Service Centers can't install them, so cars never within range of WiFi will never get updated offline maps. Not great.

 

[HankLloydRight]

Google is free.

Tesla pays for one: Garmin.

Google is free to you and me... but it's most likely not free to Tesla to put into every car.

A lot of websites use Google maps for store locations and driving directions, but if they go over a certain limit of "free" accesses, The Google Man comes knocking on their door to be paid.

I would be very surprised if Google is letting Tesla use Google maps in their cars for free.

 

[bluenation]

I wish. They did promise yearly updates, but that's not been handled well, IMO. You need WiFi to get the maps, and the Service Centers can't install them, so cars never within range of WiFi will never get updated offline maps. Not great.

ah, i didnt know they had to physically install them...and that said installation is unfeasible

Sigh... Read my post above. Cars use stored maps because they need constant connectivity. You'd REALLY complain if maps dropped out if you didn't have internet access. So, you cannot compare maps on a car vs. maps on a mobile device that is internet connected... the latter has FLOWN past the former in capability in last 3 years since Tesla Model S design had to be frozen.

Now, I think you are complaining about fact that Tesla offers BOTH google maps and nav maps and there are sometimes conflicts. OK..., so should they pull the Google maps and be like every other car designed in 2012 or before? Just stored maps? That you pay a subscription for? You can complain if you don't like Tesla's stored maps solution - that you think it is inaccurate. Or that you don't like the search, which I believe is all google. But do not compare a car nav to a connected device nav, it is not right.

Now, there may be cars shipping now that have 4g (with a subscription cost), and google maps/nav... I'm so happy with my S I don't shop much. But the MS is the ONLY car on the market that is likely to offer what you want at some point to ALL owners with minimal upgrade cost (probably just 4g radio). So "dropped the ball" is kinda harsh in view of automotive state of the art.

yes you can.

google maps on my $300 phone is superior to the one in my 70 000$ plus car. simple as that.

yes they did drop the ball.

how would it feel if your lovely nav led you stuck on a mud field? or chose a much much longer route?

not only that, there's absolutely no proof that google, data addicted behemoth that it is, would not collect elevation changes (etc) to their future map updates.

there's no indication that tesla or Gremin would do that part better than google. it's a huge task.

 

[tomas]

yes you can.

google maps on my $300 phone is superior to the one in my 70 000$ plus car. simple as that.

yes they did drop the ball.

how would it feel if your lovely nav led you stuck on a mud field? or chose a much much longer route?

not only that, there's absolutely no proof that google, data addicted behemoth that it is, would not collect elevation changes (etc) to their future map updates.

there's no indication that tesla or Gremin would do that part better than google. it's a huge task.

FAIR:

* to say that you would LIKE Tesla to use Google's maps and navigation. I would like that too. That's why I'm subscribed to this thread and also have sent letter to Tesla advocating. I'd also like to see them reuse Google or Apple media players.

* to complain about the accuracy or currency of the maps. I have not had problems with the nav, but evidenced by posts some people have.

* to assert that Google will "win" the nav/maps market. Since almost everybody has a smartphone, and almost everybody's phone has google maps... and relatively few people have a car with nav... it is clear that Google will likely win the maps and navigation battle (and, as you suggest, expand the depth of data to include elevation, etc.) with Apple the only other contender in the game.

UNFAIR:

* to condemn Tesla and say they "dropped the ball" for designing a car delivered in 2012 that uses locally stored maps (via market leader at that time, Garmin). At that time, and even today, cached maps are the ONLY nav approach used in autos, and internet connected cars are the rare exception...

* to compare network connected phone nav to locally cached auto nav.

BACK TO FAIR:

* to expect every other auto maker to eventually (as network connectivity trends to free and becomes ubiquitous) provide internet-based nav, but only for new cars.

* to expect Tesla to eventually provide internet-based nav to ALL of their cars back to the 2012 MS, with only probably upgrade requirement being cost of 4+G radio.

You should bask in the fact that you've got a future-proofed car.

 

[JPP]

Dial it back to 2012. No cars shipping with Internet access. All nav systems using on board maps. No market proof consumers will pay for Internet subscription for car. Wifi and wireless costs 3x today's price. Tesla planning to offer only 90 days free. Google maps very immature. Waze barely exists. Choice of onboard maps obvious.

fact that your phone does better today. Ok, but can your phone drive you anywhere? This is not an oversight by tesla, just a demonstration of how fast technology evolves.

Related note---I have purchased and downloaded Navigon, a full blown GPS nav app for my iPhone, and chose to download the over 1Gb of on board maps (plus POI, etc). Yes, my iPhone has great intrinsic mapping/nav (Apple Maps, Google, etc). But when my cell signal is poor or absent, and I lose connectivity, I still have a functional and very useful nav system. Without it I have a smartphone that is 'brain dead' with respect to navigation. We all can complain about the Model S nav, but re-read tomas post and understand that, at some point, TM had to 'freeze' the technology and implement what you see now.

 

[David99]

Sigh... Read my post above. Cars use stored maps because they need constant connectivity. You'd REALLY complain if maps dropped out if you didn't have internet access.

When signal is lost Waze still works just fine like any offline navigation. Only at the very start you need a short amount of internet access to calculate the route. Caching vector map data from the calculated route is not a big problem at all. Now I realize that Tesla's built in Navi will work without any connection at all, but there is absolutely no reason they can't switch to a smarter, internet based navigation while it is connected (which is the case 99% of the time for all Tesla cars on the road in the US). Tesla didn't have to 'freeze' the Navigation design 3 years ago. The last firmware update added real time traffic and smart home <-> work routing. So they are very well capable keeping the navigation system up to date and add real time data when available. The problem with Tesla's navigation is that it's a poor hybrid of two different systems not working well together. BTW Waze does not need 4G. The data it needs is very reasonable.

 

[bob_p]

We all can complain about the Model S nav, but re-read tomas post and understand that, at some point, TM had to 'freeze' the technology and implement what you see now.

For any software product, at some point the software functionality has to be frozen so the final bugs can be fixed and the software distributed - with remaining features deferred until a subsequent release. If this isn't done, software developers will continue tweaking the software and never release anything.

What hasn't happened so far with the Model S is for Tesla to re-visit the already deployed applications - and implement a "version 2" with the additional features owners want - such as basic features like playlists or navigation waypoints.

 

[hiroshiy]

How.many countries are without nav? Japan, China, Hong Kong?

 

[tomas]

What hasn't happened so far with the Model S is for Tesla to re-visit the already deployed applications - and implement a "version 2" with the additional features owners want - such as basic features like playlists or navigation waypoints.

i have been hoping that V2 of all these things would be adopting 3rd party apps wholesale with minimal customization. Every hour spent further enhancing a custom nav or media app is a total waste IMO

 

[ojee99]

Acutally, I don't mind what kind of system does the navi in the Tesla, as long as it provides better routes than it does now:

This is daily business for the Tesla navi, I hate it!

 

[russman]

Yes, I find very stupid navigation recommendations from the Tesla navi all the time, including telling me to take a parallel street with stops signs for no reason vs a lighted main street all green with no traffic.

 

[mgboyes]

I think it's important to distinguish between the different elements required to make the sat nav system function, i.e.

1. the routing engine (i.e. the bit that takes your start and end locations, preferences for road types, data about traffic conditions and road speeds etc and decides how you should get from A to B
2. the traffic data (the live information about vehicle speeds on the roads relevant to your journey)
3. the mapping itself (i.e. rendering pictures on to the screen to show you where you are going, how to behave at junctions etc, and also the voice prompts that guide you).
4. a method for telling the system where you want to go (i.e. entering an address or coordinates or search or whatever)

In just about any car these days items 1,3 and 4 are provided by an onboard system (which may be periodically updated) and item 2 comes from the internet, or radio services, or may be absent entirely.

Tesla have all of items 1 - 4 and in the UK at least the traffic data comes from a company called INRIX - it is *not* google data. You can snoop IP traffic when the car is on wifi and see it making requests to INRIX's servers.

But Tesla also have 2 extra bonus items, just to complicate things:

5. a second method for telling the system where you want to go (i.e. google free text search, only available when you have connectivity)
6. a bonus google map showing you a different view of your route, and where you are, and a *different* set of traffic information derived by google, also only available when you have connectivity.


Items 1, 3 and 4 need to be available when there is no internet service otherwise the satnav system is useless.

Prior to V6.0, items 1, 3 and 4 were all Navigon/Garmin (offline, built in) items 5 and 6 were Google (3G dependent), and item 2 did not exist.

As of V6.0 I believe item 1 is a Tesla-proprietary algorithm. It needs work, and I am quite confused as to why they decided to invest resource in implementing something that others can do so well. Item 2 is INRIX (at least in the UK, but they're a worldwide company). And items 3, 4, 5 & 6 are unchanged.

I actually find the traffic data from INRIX to be pretty decent in the UK; it closely matches what is shown on the google map.

But Tesla's routing algorithm is eccentric to say the least, and in my case the map database (item 3) is significantly out of date so I am sometimes routed down roads that are now one-way or have been blocked off.

tl;dr the sat nav still needs work

 

[wayner]

Actually - I would prefer if the Tesla used the Google owned Waze for Nav. Although it wouldn't surprise me if Google Maps and Waze share the same underlying traffic data. But Waze offers a lot more info, like warnings of traffic jams/accidents, police locations, estimated speeds of roads in km/h (or mph) rather than colour coding, etc.

 

[RichardL]

I think (1) has to be Tesla sourced in order to allow it to do the 'EV specific' functions just showing up in 6.1 - energy usage, taking elevation into account and (hopefully soon) directing you via Superchargers etc.

I assume no one else is providing those functions - so its one of those 'in order to get the last 10%, they have to re-implement the current 90%'

 

[mgboyes]

I think (1) has to be Tesla sourced in order to allow it to do the 'EV specific' functions just showing up in 6.1 - energy usage, taking elevation into account and (hopefully soon) directing you via Superchargers etc.

I assume no one else is providing those functions - so its one of those 'in order to get the last 10%, they have to re-implement the current 90%'

Showing the expected energy usage of a route isn't a part of the route calculation - the car could simply take the output from the Navigon/Garmin routing engine and then decide how much energy it expects to be used over that route. Same way that evtripplanner.com doesn't do its own routing calculations - it just takes google's proposed route and works out the expected energy usage.

Redirecting via superchargers, or taking the "most economic" route are things that might require a custom routing algorithm, agreed (though routing via interim waypoints is something that in-car satnav systems have had for 20 years so I'm still not 100% convinced).