• sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.todayOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    I would disagree. I have both and use each for different tasks.

    OSMAnd is clunky and unintuitive. I have learned it well and have it setup for land navigation type stuff. It’s incredibly good at displaying every last detail of the topography.

    Organic Maps is fantastic for city navigation. It’s smooth and quick and ever since the addition of turn-by-turn voice navigation I’m in love. I use the Sherpa Onnx voices and they sound so lifelike.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Interesting perspective. I too have used Osmand (or “OsmAnd” or “OSMAnd” or whatever unpronounceable official name it is) for years. 13 years to be precisely, without a break. I’ve contributed numerous bug reports and feature requests. It’s clunky and unintuitive yes, but I’ve seen worse in other power apps of this kind.

      But Osmand is still lacking a couple of features on my personal wishlist, so I naturally gave Organic Maps a decent audition, navigation included. I found that it did only one thing better: rendering of subway lines in dense cities. But this has now been largely fixed by a new setting in Osmand (cleverly hidden, obviously). In everything else, OM just felt to me like a poor man’s alternative to Osmand. With a busy hive of developers earnestly working towards feature parity sometime in the next millennium.

      These two projects have the exactly the same objectives. I continue to wish the OM developers would just put aside their egos and help fix whatever it is they don’t like in Osmand. That’s the point of FOSS.