Comparsion of Google Maps and OpenStreetMap

Maps and Routing in Websites 

Comparison between Google Maps and OpenStreetMap

The different appearance of the maps

Today, I will talk about the differences the two maps themselves have, but also about their common features. To start off I want to talk about the differences in the appearance of the maps. This is most easily explained with some pictures, so here we go:

@OpenStreetMap contributors                                                @Google Maps

In both pictures you can see the same place, Central Park in New York. The one on the left is taken from OpenStreetMap, the right one is from Google Maps. You will immediately notice that the two maps have a different appearance: while Google Maps mostly shows the name of restaurants, shops, museums, etc., OpenStreetMap shows more names of the places in the park. This does not mean they are not written in the respective other map, but the two maps just have different priorities of which names they show. But not only are the names different, also the surfaces: OSM (OpenStreetMap) uses more colours, but for some users taste, there could be too many, whereas Google Maps sometimes looks a bit empty. But what applies for less crowded places? Here you can see Reinswald, a place not so far away from where I live:

@OpenStreetMap contributors                                                     @Google Maps

I allowed both maps auto-route the hiking path from the top end of the cable-way to the so-called “Kassianspitz”, a mountain peak a few kilometres away. OpenStreetMap suggests the shortest possible solution, using existing hiking trails and gives me a route about 6.3 km long. But Google Maps lacks of these hiking trails in many areas, for example in the one given here. For it, the shortest route is going all around the mountains and approaches the peak from the other side. The route that Google Maps calculated is 68.3 km long! The different result comes from the origins of both maps: Google Maps belongs to Google, which documents the map on its own. OpenStreetMap is open-source, and anyone can contribute to it, so maybe a resident of Reinswald, maybe someone else, once documented the different trails that are offered in this area. Anyone can contribute to OpenStreetMap, which makes it also possible to document outlying places. If you want to use a map, be sure to check if the place you want to display, or the trails and streets you need for your route exist in the solution you prefer.

The different licenses

Another big difference is the licences both maps have: OpenStreetMap has, as its name already suggests, an open license, whereas Google Maps uses the Google copyright, with some additions. You can find more information here: Google Maps and OpenStreetMap. The use is free for both, but, depending what you need the respective map for, you should check these copyrights, especially if you need them for commercial use.

Which one is better?

I personally prefer OpenStreetMap, because of its appearance that has more colours, and a lot more information. I also think that Google Maps is more oriented towards business, it primarily shows shops, theatres and museums, whereas OSM prioritises cultural names or names of important places. If you only need a static map, I would still take Google Maps because its use is simple, but if you need more features, I would suggest using OpenStreetMap.