« Four Things Meme | Main | Social software, circa 1970 »
February 06, 2006
Dashworlds
I don’t think I buy this argument for new in-car nav systems offering photo-realistic views.
“It’s not the way we actually perceive the environment,” [spokesman] Stoschek said. “A photo representation of the surrounding environment with respect to the car is a much better way for navigation. … Visuals of locations, however, would be very compelling. They would present a better experience than just maps.”
Really? All those abstracted top-down maps humans have been making all this time turn out not to be the best navigation tools? I read this and immediately think of how lost I can get in Grand Theft Auto, even after many hours with the game. And how could they possibly keep their image libraries up to date enough to be accurate? They imply they’d be updated monthly, which seems impossible. Can you imagine re-photographing every building in New York City every month? There’s a big gulf between the good enough representation of a location on a map, and an accurate street-level photo of the same thing.
Posted by Andrew at February 6, 2006 01:47 PM