Forgive my ignorance, but what is the motivation of the current iteration of OpenStreetView when there is Mapillary?
Please, this is really a question, I'm not trying to start a flame war or something. But I don't understand why there are two competitors of (AFAICT) freely available street level images. I just couldn't see the difference between the projects. Thanks in advance. --Nighto (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
- I spotted this extensive github discussion of differences and comparisons between OpenStreetCam and Mapillary (including input from developers of both) . It might be good to try to distill some points from that onto a wiki page linked from here and from Mapillary. We might call the page something like "Comparison of street level photo services" -- Harry Wood (talk) 11:55, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
What's the point of having OpenStreetMap, when there's bing? What's the point of having Bing when there's google? Each offers it's own advantages and if one service dies it can still fill the need. Think if mapillary died tomorrow is there another project to go to? Nope.
OSC vs Mapillary License
The Wiki marks Mapillary as "Properiatary" and OpenStreetCam as "free", but according to this discussion (see this and this, or read the entire discussion), it appears the licenses are roughly identical.
- Neither project is completely free or completely proprietary, but OpenStreetCam has more FOSS elements than Mapillary does. Martijn van Exel (talk) 21:56, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
- If a project needs a proprietary component to be used, I'd call the whole thing proprietary whether or not other parts are freely released. On the other hand, if all proprietary parts are superficial and not strictly necessary to use the whole, then the parts that are not proprietary could be described as a single libre project. Arlo James Barnes (talk) 21:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)