Hi,
I responded to a UR and eventually got a reply (which I missed) and Iain picked up on it. Report Here.
This issue is actually a google one, not a Waze one because Waze uses googles search result to route to “x”. So when google hasn’t a clue, Waze hasn’t a clue either and fails to use search results from it’s own database. This is an unacceptable failure on Waze’s part for the users who, not knowing that the issue lies elsewhere, ditches Waze for something else.
Worse, to get Waze to work properly, an editor (Iain in this case) has to spend time correcting googles maps. Sorry, but we are not here to clean up for google. That’s what THEY are PAID for… I would have reported an issue, maybe, to say the location was incorrect and let them do the dirty work to sort it out. Bing knows there the location is, so why not google??!!
Didn’t we used to have Bing search results?
If the location was added (as a landmark) couldn’t Waze find it in there search? It is all very well telling people to not bother adding landmarks because “they don’t show up” or because “the result will come from google” - it obviously won’t in this and undoubtedly many other cases…
I mentioned something similar in This topic a while ago.
So…
Why are we spending our time an effort on identifying (and fixing) google errors and not getting suitable Waze search results, or making sure that we have suitable Waze results? Wouldn’t our time be better spent making sure WAZE works properly and not making sure google is up-to-date?
Des. . . 
+1
Have had to fix postcodes, landmarks and add roads on Google to get Waze to work!
I generally agree with Des’ point. However, there is another way of looking at this.
It has always been said that Waze shouldn’t be cluttered up with individual business landmarks. If we wanted to supplant Google search with Waze search it would be a massive amount of work to get the data into Waze and then a significant amount of work for us to keep it up to date. Yes, it’s annoying to have to correct Google’s data to get Waze to work properly, but using Google saves us a massively larger amount of work in return. I also don’t mind making the occasional correction to a pin location in Google. The same principle that motivates me in Waze - helping other road users - applies to making Google results better, although my chosen focus is entirely on Waze.
There is something that worries me more. I have seen it mentioned a couple of times that Waze can’t find a road if it’s not in Google - even if it exists in Waze. I had this happen to me recently - I added some roads in a new housing development that isn’t on Google or Bing’s maps. Although the road is now on the Waze map it cannot be found in Waze search. Because of what I’ve heard, I’ve added these roads in Google Map Maker, where I’m a very junior editor. :oops: When my edits are reviewed and (hopefully) approved, I’ll see if they can then be found in Waze.
I can understand that, since Google owns Waze, they want to get some value for their money. However, I’m going to be pretty angry if it becomes normal for us to be forced to add roads to Google Maps as well before they can be used in Waze. :x
Hi,
Whilst I agree with much of what you say Iain, I think there needs to be a line drawn between correcting Waze and helping google. Afterall, if we have to improve google maps to the point where they are as up-to-date and accurate as Waze, what is the point of someone selecting Waze over the Android built-in google maps or installing google maps on apple over Waze on apple?
For new users, google would be the obvious choice not knowing that it was Waze users and editors that made google what it was?
And because of that I think that Waze editors need to have a cohesive approach to updating google maps. Don’t. But tell them that they have an issue at x location which needs to be fixed. Would this be feasible?
Maybe this is why google bought Waze for the $1 billion? A cheaper way to employ a few thousand people to update their maps?
Don’t be afraid of posting your views/comments. Please…
Des. . .
Just to add my two cents, I’ve always wondered about the “Waze shouldn’t be cluttered up with individual business landmarks”.
For one part I’ve seen the argument of it makes the map look cluttered - well thats a matter of opinion surely? Some people like to see that kind of detail on the map, some people don’t, if it looks poor then surely the concentration should be on waze to improve how it looks. As always I will assume opinion is divided, but then it usually is. Make it option like other sat navs have to show/hide levels of detail.
I know of lot of these ideas were thought up years ago, and are often (correct me if I am wrong) thought up by the community. Now I have noticed on a few occasions that the communities impression of where Waze is/should be going sometimes differs from Waze’s ideas.
From what I have read on the landmark changes on the US server would allow for more detail without cluttering up the map, so won’t this partially resolve this argument?
With regards to other things not appearing in waze serach until updated on Google, are these being reported? I’m not sure what differences there currently are in terms of search in the UK and US, but a recent post I saw suggested waze search should be providing these results where they exist.
One thing I would like to add/request on this related subject is the champs (afaik) have access to far more info on future plans, updates on changes, bugs etc. I personally would love to see more on this sort of thing and possibly more community feedback requests, as whilst I don’t see the full picture so I am not saying this is the case, but sometimes it can seem like there is some sort of monopoly with a few select few deciding things for the whole community. Of course I could be completely mistaken and there is nothing that goes on behind the scenes that we don’t see.
Please don’t take this as a complaint or negative, as is it certainly not meant that way. I have full respect for those above and the job they do, so feel free to put me in my place if my view is completely misguided 
lol
I think that when we get enough places in waze that it should start to use it first. I wish that it would do this now for some of the places I have added as I am still waiting on a response from Google for over two weeks. I think that I will be a lot of work but worth it in the long run to input these locations in waze. The places landmarks do not show up on the map but it is hard to find them in a search at this time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk