"We'll look into it?" HA! Isn't that what they were saying when people were asking them about Google Maps in the first place?

by monkeyrotica on Dec 15, 2008 10:34 am • link • report

Anyone else notice that meenster stopped working too? Likely with the introduction of their new webpage... So now they block Google AND other local innovators-isn't that just special?

by dumbwamata on Dec 15, 2008 11:22 am • link • report

The irony is that WMATA uses Google based maps for their new interface.

by Boots on Dec 15, 2008 11:33 am • link • report

After a little tinkering I got the PID links on my PDA to work again. Now if I only hadn't deleted my address book in the process...

by Steve on Dec 15, 2008 12:39 pm • link • report

I have no issues with the petition. I am however getting tired of the moaning about broken WMATA bookmarks on PDAs/IPhones. Suck it up and reprogram them in.

by Jason on Dec 15, 2008 1:44 pm • link • report

Having dealt with public agencies on similar issues, the biggest problem with Google Transit is probably the "not invented here syndrome," the same reason you won't find Amtrak tickets on budget travel agency sites like Travelocity and Expedia. But, the airlines are for-profit (purportedly) and they freely exchange schedule and pricing data because it's in their best interest to do so.

by Paul on Dec 15, 2008 4:14 pm • link • report

I took a look at Google Transit and tried it for NY, and it seemed to be inferior to what WMATA offers on its own web-site, so it isn't clear to me why WMATA would want to use its resources to convert its information to Google's format. Of course, the information is publicly avaialable, and Google can convert the information at its own expense in order to add Washington area public transportation to its site. In looking through the list of cities covered, I also noticed that many other cities, such as Boston, weren't on the list. This effort seems to be a thinly veiled campaign to have WMATA go through the expense to provide data to Google at no cost that does not improve WMATA's service, but does improve Google's bottom line.

by Andy on Dec 15, 2008 5:00 pm • link • report

My thoughts on why the reluctance:

1. WMATA only wants one source for users to go to for this information, therefore they can track usage more accurately. Hence they can then justify spending.

2. Possible ad revenue opportunity. Look what they can do to Metro Center.

3. Slightly related to #1: During outages and for system-wide announcements, they have a better chance to reach their riders.

by RedShirt on Dec 15, 2008 5:17 pm • link • report

Andy, check out Portland, OR or Seattle, WA if you'd like to see what Google transit can do for you. The following (if the link works right) is an example using a hotel and pub I've frequented in Portland - it is a very simple way to use transit. http://tinyurl.com/5rvt5u.

by Chris on Dec 15, 2008 5:48 pm • link • report

Chris, The WMATA trip planner is clearly superior to Google Transit, allowing you to provide a maximum walking distance, and a priority, like whether you want to minimize time, transfers or walking, as well as whether the trip should use rail, bus or both. WMATA provides several alternatives for each query. It seems that this campaign benefits Google shareholders, and not DC area residents.

by Andy on Dec 15, 2008 6:07 pm • link • report

Andy, WMATA's trip planner is not superior to Google Transit at all. It is different. Google's advantage is that all of their searches are integrated, not just transit. You can find businesses around stations, you can look at aerial photos, you can shift modes, you can search just about anything.

WMATA's trip planner is good at what it does, but that only represents a very narrow scope of what urban living and urban mobility is all about.

This is not an either/or proposition.

Andy, how does increasing the availablity of Metro information hurt DC residents and Metro riders?

by Alex B. on Dec 15, 2008 6:15 pm • link • report

This isn't just about Google. If WMATA released the schedule data, enterprising programmers could create their own trip planners. Someone could create an analysis of the best way to get to any neighborhood from your house. Or create a better bus map that better shows bus frequencies. Or one of many other possible things.

Plus, even if the trip planner is better, Google spends more effort getting Maps on mobile phones and other devices.

Full disclosure: I do still own stock in Google. And almost nearly zero of its value comes from Google Transit.

by David Alpert on Dec 15, 2008 6:17 pm • link • report

Andy, Not to belabor the point - but my comment mentioned ease of use, not superiority, both of which are extremely subjective. I find the WMATA trip planner to be terrible to use. Sure, I have all those options - but I don't know where I am when I get off the bus. Google shows me the map and transit options - in a very familiar interface - so I can get from the bus stop to my final destination. If I use the WMATA trip planner I have to go to Google Maps when I am finished anyway to figure out where to go from the bus stop.

The real point is not that Google Transit is better or worse (that will depend on what you want) but that there should be options in order for me to plan my trip. I prefer the ease of use of Google Transit over the options provided me by WMATA's Trip Planner. You obviously don't. Why can't we both be happy?

by Chris on Dec 15, 2008 6:24 pm • link • report

Chris, Have you tried the WMATA web-site? If you don't know where you are when you get off the bus, WMATA's trip planner includes a very familiar Google Map to get you from the bus stop to your final destination in addition to the text directions. The point isn't whether Google or WMATA trip planners are better or worse, but whether WMATA, DC area taxpayers and riders, should pay to convert the publicly available data into Google's format.

by Andy on Dec 16, 2008 7:58 am • link • report

Andy, I'm no software developer, but the cost involved to WMATA to provide the information is minimal. The benefits are huge.

This is a turf battle, plain and simple. The losers are the riders of the system.

by Alex B. on Dec 16, 2008 8:58 am • link • report

It's all a matter of preference, but I have used Trip Planner and find it to be not useful, especially compared to the experience I have had using Google Transit when visiting other cities. Also, the maps that are provided by WMATA are only for Metro stations (sometimes I ride the bus to a place where there isn't a station) and cannot be manipulated in the way that a normal Google map, used by Google Transit, can be. You can click on the map, which opens Google Maps, in which case you might as well have just used Google Transit, except it isn't available.

I didn't mean to start an argument over the merits of Google Transit though. I think it is a wonderfully easy to use system and has many advantages over a specific agencies trip planner, most importantly the familiarity of interface no matter where you might be trying to find transit information. I see the benefits of the trip planner as well, I just wonder why we can't have both (and other possibilities if the market wants them) and let the customer decide.

by Chris on Dec 16, 2008 9:59 am • link • report

I just wanted to continue on my post from this morning. I, until a few minutes ago, did not see the walking directions from the WMATA website Trip Planner. Sorry to Andy, I was wrong about the fact that I missed that and argued with you.

A point of note though. I used the trip planner to go from my current home in Arlington to my old home in Hyattsville. The walking directions on the Hyattsville end were, to be kind, not very good. They would eventually get you there, but I would never walk that way from the PG Plaza station to my old house. To be fair, Google Maps gave poor directions as well, not being able to locate the station exit correctly.

by Chris on Dec 16, 2008 8:12 pm • link • report