Google v Bing sat view
 

Pardon me if it's obvious but has anyone noticed how much better Bing 'Aerial' has become lately once you zoom right in?

I'm sure it was barely worth it a year or two back and I always go to Google sat view or Earth, but in places in Morocco (and elsewhere in the Sahara, I found recently) it's like the best of Google sat. They are clearly separate images; how lucky we are to have satellite images to choose from.

Here's a particularly 'unfair' example of Bing v Google in Chegaga.

Ch

I just rely on your routes Chris :thumbup1:

I have noticed to be honest but only in the uk not really checked Morocco etc.

I normally plot a route using Olaf etc then play it back in GE checking for that horrible tarmac they keep putting down. If I need a route that doesn't get covered in Olaf, your book etc then I've plotted via GE back into Mapsource.

Bit me last year with a short cut between MA6KM20 north to MH9 KM30 ish. GE looked ok, OSM had a piste but it turned into a goat track about 1km form MH9 :(

Hi Chris, you have a point and your examples are quite good :thumbup1:

Google maps, on the other hand, (still) has the advantage of superimposing photos from Panoramio.
Don't know also if it is possible load GPS tracks to Bing maps.

BR,
Luís

Bing sings for me
 

Hi Chris,

I agree. Take Tanger Med port. The Google images show it under construction and must be at least 5 years old. Bing shows it completed.

Peter

I dont know either Luis. For all that stuff Google maps works for me, but it's interesting to know that a poor area on Google sat may now be crystal clear in Bing aerial. Both are among the best things that have happened to mapping, IMO.

Ch

One of the benefits of Bing is that you can view OS maps, and yes, you can import GPX files.

Dave