5 ms·
How is it different from OSMAnd?
by codingjoe 3mo ago
How is it different from OSMAnd?
- TFNA 3mo agoIt's a fork from Maps.me, the streamlined map app popular with normies. I myself use and love OSMAnd, but in the travel communities I am active in, most people react badly to OSMAnd as something arcane and nerdy.
- fender256 2mo agoArcane and nerdy is a good description of OSMAnd. That's why I love it and would never switch to anything else.
- frabcus 3mo agoBetter and easier to understand and use UX.
- xigoi 3mo agoMuch better performance and much less cluttered UI, at the cost of having fewer features.
- orbital-decay 2mo agoAnd at the cost of map fidelity. Complex curves look terrible at certain zoom levels in CoMaps/Organic Maps.
- Aachen 2mo agoSame in OsmAnd though. Someone recently posted a screenshot of an area they thought was badly mapped (with AI or at least not using the "make square corners" tool). Turns out to be Osmand's coordinate rounding as part of the map data compression Comparing a building in my city between the two maps by flipping between the apps, it looks identical to me. Not a scientific test though
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- bluebarbet 2mo agoThe performance advantage is small to nil, IME. The UI is admittedly cleaner, though partly (as you say) that's simply because it has a ton less features.
- xigoi 2mo agoInteresting. When I switched from OsmAnd to Organic, the map loaded much faster as I panned it.
- orbital-decay 2mo agoThe difference mostly comes from the default detail levels and shape optimization. You can make it as fast in OsmAnd as both are GPU-accelerated, but OsmAnd renders the map more detailed by default.
- Markoff 2mo agomuch better UI, does osmand has now colored hiking trails without downloading some extra maps?
- codingjoe 2mo agoYes, you can toggle a setting to use the network colors. I use it mostly for hiking. The UI is a learning curve, 100%, I am curious to check another tool