http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/ Engadget Comments for NAVTEQ, Microsoft team up for better 3D maps http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 11:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
I'm actually digging the Bing Maps Beta...except i'm not so sure it's good on my resources.. the cpu usage does hike a bit during fly by...

But otherwise, I actually prefer it and like it because of the visuals and high res images..


Yes no streetview but it's still nice]]>Dec 7th 2009 11:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
I'm actually digging the Bing Maps Beta...except i'm not so sure it's good on my resources.. the cpu usage does hike a bit during fly by...

But otherwise, I actually prefer it and like it because of the visuals and high res images..]]>Dec 7th 2009 11:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/The rason it hogs CPU and the reason it seems so much snappier than google maps are the same: it does those fancy fade-in transitions and doesn't leave you with grey blocks while its loading.

I agree though, it seems a lot faster than google and I dig the birds-eye view. Here's hoping they expand their streetview cities (something like only 12 so far) and use that lovely Photosynth technology to get more imagery from the web ASAP.]]>Dec 7th 2009 12:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.bing.com/maps/ right now and it loads things in chunks just like Google does...

Every time I've seen a site that uses Bing maps, I usually copy the address and put it in Google because it handles it better and usually works. I've been house hunting and some realtors use it. None of them seem to show the right address or they default to the whole country view.

It's pathetic.]]>Dec 7th 2009 12:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.bing.com/maps/explore/]]>Dec 7th 2009 1:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 1:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 1:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
It loads really quick for me, but my it puts my cpu at an average of 30% with peaking at 70%... I have a quad-core 2.6ghz too, so I can't imagine what it would do to a single core processor. Google Maps on the other hand (using Chrome) only uses about 5-10% of my cpu... huge difference. I personally like the fade and some other minor details about Bing's maps, but I'll probably still stick with Google.]]>Dec 7th 2009 1:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
It's only fast because it's less popular than Google's...

IF it becomes as popular, just watch it slow to a crawl.]]>Dec 7th 2009 2:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Funny thing - I have a dual core penryn that seems to stay at 30-70% usage regardless of whether it runs at 2.53ghz or 1.2ghz (power saver-throttled CPU).

Having developed for Silverlight with a few performance-intensive applications, my guess is that it throttles frame-rates depending on how much processing power you have available. In my experience I've seen it do 16.67, 30 and 60fps depending on how fast it could manage it.

Anyone have a netbook on hand and care to share how well it works?]]>Dec 7th 2009 3:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 11:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
I'm actually digging the Bing Maps Beta...except i'm not so sure it's good on my resources.. the cpu usage does hike a bit during fly by...

But otherwise, I actually prefer it and like it because of the visuals and high res images..]]>Dec 7th 2009 11:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 11:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 12:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
Agree here as well. Laredo, Texas is HORRIBLE. I would say it only knows about 75% of the roads here.]]>Dec 7th 2009 12:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
Are you actually digging the Bing Maps Beta?

Are you sure it's good on your resources?

Does the cpu usage hike a bit during fly by?

Do you actually prefer it and like it because of the visuals and high res images?]]>Dec 7th 2009 12:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 12:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Navteq updates their maps several times a year, but toyota is probably still using ancient maps so blame toyota. Personally I think Navteq has some of the best map data. A few days ago I looked up the UPS store on google maps and it took me to a non-existent address. Then I grabbed my Garmin out of the glove box (which has the latest Navteq maps). It did not have that same false hit that google maps had, and instead routed me to a USP store a couple miles away that was in a shopping center that opened up within the past year.]]>Dec 7th 2009 12:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Companies that use navteq maps never seem to update them. My in-laws GPS is over 3 yrs with no updates. You can't get the maps directly from navteq, so they should just buy a new GPS.

Navteq maps on a device is not a selling point for me. In fact I would/have avoided devices for that reason.]]>Dec 7th 2009 1:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 12:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
]]>Dec 7th 2009 12:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 7th 2009 12:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
silverlight is a much stronger language than JavaScript, and more powerful.]]>Dec 7th 2009 1:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
Everyone has opinions... your opinion seems to be backed by nothing but marketing though...]]>Dec 7th 2009 1:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/The problem with JS is it's 100% reliant upon the users browser. Until HTML5 is released, and all browsers support it, Silverlight/Flash will always overpower Javascript.

javascript cries when doing massive amounts of trig/calculus functions. Flash/Silverlight can do these with ease. Strong graphics support and CPU support.

]]>Dec 7th 2009 2:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Garmin using it, and so Microsoft.

Google ever used it but not now, so now it sucks. 5 out 10 will direct you to a wrong place even if you give it right address to search.

Navteq go!]]>Dec 7th 2009 1:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/
So you think 2 huge companies (Microsoft/Google) wouldnt know how to scale there services?

i somehow find that hard to believe!]]>Dec 7th 2009 3:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/07/navteq-microsoft-team-up-for-better-3d-maps/Dec 8th 2009 12:48AM