gettingthere wrote:I still can't understand why the number of active Wazers does not correspond more closely with the number of editors. LA and Orange county seem to be in dire need or more active map editors.

There's some, AMs even, and seem to be following the wiki, they just don't post in the forums for whatever reason. And IGN seems active and doing correct work, but they don't close URs (good thing).

It seems like about 5-10% of the URs so far are inside the 500m limit, which has been covered in the other thread having to do with UR traces.

R4CLucky14 wrote:

bgodette wrote:

gettingthere wrote:I still can't understand why the number of active Wazers does not correspond more closely with the number of editors. LA and Orange county seem to be in dire need or more active map editors.

There's some, AMs even, and seem to be following the wiki, they just don't post in the forums for whatever reason. And IGN seems active and doing correct work, but they don't close URs (good thing).

It seems like about 5-10% of the URs so far are inside the 500m limit, which has been covered in the other thread having to do with UR traces.

Speaking of IGN, I finally came over some of their edits. They seem nit-picky. They pick one section of a road, then update that one section, and leave. Then I come along a year later, find that the rest of the road is a basemapped nightmare. No wonder why they left my area for a year . . . and still haven't come back from what I've seen.

IGN appears to work primarily on MPs, sometimes those coincide with URs so it looks like they are working URs. They also seem to work with the philosophy of minimum changes needed to fix the MP, which is also fine since they're not local editors and only have the possibly outdated aerial, MP trace, and the currently out of date GPS layer to go on.

Spil wrote:Rush hour in my town? Well ... I have seen one other Wazer (the same one!) two days in a row while on my way home from work in the morning ... does that count?

Sure it wasn't a cow with a cell phone? This is upstate NY we're talking about after all.

CBenson wrote:Over 1150 at 6:00 pm in Washington, DC yesterday.

So with that many users, how well does it work for rerouting, or is the map in DC still not mature enough?

gettingthere wrote:This proves krankyd's point that one of Waze's greatest challenges is to get people to run Waze everyone they drive. Not only when traffic is bad.

If all of these part-time Wazers would run Waze daily, we would have fantastic real time traffic in most major metropolitan areas.

Yup, I've noticed that around here as well. I've seen "baby" Wazers spread like wildfire whenever there's abnormally bad traffic. Part of it is also some of the apparent part-timers are those you'd normally never see as their commute would normally be over.

Denver: 4:06pm
323
92
162

Up about 100 from 6 months ago or so.

Denver, CO @ 5:06pm
454
129
173

It's all my phone's fault for using Tapatalk.

jasonh300 wrote:At 4:00 pm today, there was 114 Wazers in the area. That's the first time I've seen it over 100 here, with the exception of during Mardi Gras this year.

Right now at 5:45, I'm seeing 141. I guess Waze has finally grabbed some new users here!

They're all out of state truckers come to mess with your maps.

753 in Denver, up from ~550 last month, thanks iOS6 Maps.

Poopstick wrote:Very nice initiative and good job!



One thing, though : the maximum number of wazers in your graphs doesn't match what I get daily through the app. We usually reach 5500± by 18.00. Do you know what causes such a difference in figures? http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/03/01/utevyju9.jpg

Unless he's doing something different now, the last I knew he was using the Live Map interface and keeping track of usernames while scanning the area, and not the "Near you now" interface that the app uses.