Google Maps to Start Charging for their Service

[Rachel_Sandford]

Google maps is without question the most used map service on the web. Providing customized maps, street views, and driving directions, if you need to figure out how to get anywhere in the world, you get on Google maps. Many websites even use Google Maps API, which lets site owners integrate the Google maps service onto their website, assuring that users don't need to click any where else for directions.

This week, the company announced that beginning January 1[SUP]st[/SUP], 2012, it will begin charging for the service on 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] party sites, particularly those that go beyond 25,000 loads per day. Usually these are the sites whose businesses rely on maps and location. Travel agencies and travel tips sites are two examples, while some hotel chains are another.

According to the search engine giant, this new system will only affect 0.35% of users. Thor Mitchell, Google Maps API product manager said in a statement: “We understand that the introduction of these limits may be concerning, however, with the continued growth in adoption of the Maps API, we need to secure its long-term future by ensuring that even when used by the highest-volume for-profit sites, the service remains viable.”

The company announced that they intend to charge $4-1$0 per day for every 1,000 loads beyond the limit. This is because beyond 25,000 and these sites are making money at Google's expense, taking up bandwidth without paying for it. Google has been offering a Premier API intended for business use, and it starts at $10,000 per year. Depending on how often Google maps is used, third party sites can determine whether or not to get the Premier API or be charged per day.

 

[PaulR]

Whew, I thought for a moment it was going to affect me directly.

I can see some professional users switching to other providers such as Bing aps. The crown jewels that Google maps have though is their excellent Street View option and there is no alternative to that if it's embedded into an application.

Having said that I find Bing maps to be be superior to Google when it comes to viewing different types of maps and especially when it comes to printing options where you can print part of the map - something that's not allowed in Google.

 

[smoggy07]

I wonder if the Dishpointer guy is willing to pay them or do you think we`ll see DP start to use Bing lol

 

[Alex2]

Usually once they start charging, they will gradually cover everyone using it.

 

[PaulR]

It reminds me of the way that $ly started. First of all there were about four channels, all Free to Air. Then a few more channels were added. Then encryption was introduced on the premium channels. And finally encryption has smothered almost everything.

Subscription charges which were once just an mild inconvenience have now increased to eye watering levels.

You have been warned!

 

[rolfw]

Thought Sky were always a subscription service, I certainly can't remember a time when they weren't. This just looks like Google flexing their muscles with businesses who are using the free maps and then charging for the service.

Apps like dishpointer may well be a casualty, but then they've been charging for the mobile phone app and charge for a full embedded version on a website.

 

[2cvbloke]

So, they're going to make even more money than they already are (especially from youtube users who make money through partnership, then Google revoke their adsense account before they pay out and pocket the money made!!!), that'll be popular...

I think that they're probably going to offer a basic "free" version for most users, and if you want more, such as directions and whatnot, you have to buy into it, just as with Google Earth, you have the basic free version, and then there's the "Pro" version which has more features and clearer imagery, which you have to pay for of course, so it's already begun, they're just extending it to the web based maps service...

As for $ky, from what I've learned, they originally started out as free to air, claiming their money from advertisers, all you needed to do was buy a dish and a receiver and tuned in, then later they "merged" with BSB and that's when the trouble began and they started encrypting channel after channel...

 

[PaulR]

As for $ky, from what I've learned, they originally started out as free to air, claiming their money from advertisers, all you needed to do was buy a dish and a receiver and tuned in, then later they "merged" with BSB and that's when the trouble began and they started encrypting channel after channel...

That's more-or-less as I remember it although, never having been a subscriber, I could be wrong. Anyway the principle is the same as the drug dealer with his free sample: tempt, capture and then charge like hell!

 

[Lazarus]

And the sane response is the same ................. "Just say NO"!!

 

[rolfw]

Just been reading up on this and what is not mentioned here, is that both Sky and BSB were losing money with their business models, as did they after the merger for quite some time. Also with Sky prior to 1989/90 they had a single channel, so not much of a taste to tempt.

I don't have a problem with companies making money out of unique services or material, particularly if they offer a limited version of the product for free for non-commercial use.

I've stopped using Google Navigation on my HTC phone (so won't be affected if they charge for it), as due to its need to download maps on a constant basis, it can be somewhat unreliable in bad reception areas and costly on data usage, choosing instead to pay for a navigation app with cached maps.

 

[pgh13]

Fx: Smiles knowingly; hums The Last DJ!