AFAIK Google gets its traffic info in the UK from one of the mobile phone operators.
I have noticed that Waze seem to have an equally dense indication on its route maps showing stretches of slow traffic. Surely such density is not possible using other Waze users’ tracking alone?
I an wondering if
a) Waze has a traffic activity feed from a UK mobile network
b) Waze gets to share Google’s traffic activity feed
One thing that makes Waze better is how clearly on its map the slow stretches are shown, with a bright red line with traffic crawling like a queue of ants.
Google Maps on IOS by comparison forces me to squint hard for the same info. But especially, Google Maps does not have a list of alternative routes based on traffic info, like Waze does.
TomTom has used anonymised tracking info from the mobile operators for a long time - every phone is tracked based on tower triangulation and movement interpolation (rather than using the phone’s GPS which would require the phone owner to enable it)
Hmm just did a spot check, early afternoon well known trouble spot Twin Bridges roundabout Bracknell Berks.
Google Maps with traffic - major tailbacks on 3 of the roads entering this roundabout.
Waze Map - Nothing happening at all.
So, Google maps have a massive advantage in having ALL the realtime traffic movement.
Waze must be relying on Waze users only, and no Waze users happen to be using their app near Twin Bridges Bracknell.
Waze displays traffic differently from Google. With Google, you see traffic marked when there are a lot of cars or when they’re running slowly.
With Waze, you see traffic marked when traffic is moving slower than usual for that time of day. If, as you say, this location is well known for traffic delays at that time of day, then Waze will only highlight it on the map if it’s considerably worse than usual. Also, if a Waze user reports a traffic jam, that will trigger highlighting to show up.
Note that the highlighting is a visual thing only. Waze calculates routes based on the current (historical if no current data) traffic speeds of the segments, regardless of highlighting.
As an example, in my daily commute, I use a small street to access a major dual carriageway. There is always a 5-minute delay waiting to turn onto the dual carriageway, but that is less than the delay of negotiating small streets to the next junction where the turning is just as difficult. Waze only ever highlights my small street if the delay is far worse than the normal 5 minutes.
There are differing opinions over which method of highlighting is better. In my opinion, Google’s highlighting is better if you want to look at the map & navigate yourself. Waze’s is better if you’re going to trust Waze to do the routing. If you hit a delay and nothing is highlighted, you can assume that this delay is normal for the time of day and hope that Waze has correctly taken account of it. :lol:
If you report any hazard on the road you are driving on, you will usually get an immediate color update for the segment you are on (and sometimes for several segments near you).
Agreed. Waze giving you a different route when you can clearly see on the map that there is “no traffic” on your usual route is no way to build trust. At a minimum, Waze should at least passively show you why you’re taking the other way home.
+1 well put. In recent times I have frequently ignored Waze’s route, cause a visual check showed there was no traffic on the other route, ending up stuck in traffic. It’s that stupid thing about humans, they like to think for themselves.
