Routebuddy Bites Back !!!

I don’t know you spend week writing gibberish and then suddenly all hell breaks loose in a couple of hours!

My review of Anquet Maps for Mac, posted this morning, has already elicited and very interesting response from Neil Wilson-Harris the CEO of Routebuddy (the main competition). Neil is an interesting guy who really knows his stuff and who sets out to create world class products. He’s always been very helpful to me in the past and his comments to the post are worth reading here.

Neil — if you’re reading this — here are some thoughts.

Firstly, an apology. Sloppy writing made me suggest that Routebuddy cost £100 when it is nearly $100. You’re right; I was £40 out. However, I still need to lay out £60 for Routebuddy so the product needs to be good, of real quality and — importantly — have a lifespan beyond the immediate.

The review in question was of Anquet Maps for Mac and is such dealt mainly with the usability of that program. The bottom line is that Anquet for Macs is fully functional and works effectively. However, the review also reflect on where this product doesn’t score well:

* The interface which really does not make the best use of Mac Design;

* The annoying lack of information and data as Maps are downloading

* The rather outdated Map pop-up window.

What is good about Routebuddy?

I also hint in the review at those areas where Routebuddy scores. It has a better screen representation not surprising when you realise it uses vectors rather than bitmaps. Routebuddy’s view is that this is a better, qualitative system and let’s be clear — in many ways it is, both on a desktop and a laptop machine.

The comments about the interface can be extended into the use of the program. Plotting a route on Routebuddy is dead easy and intuitive. Personally, (and I think I said this) I prefer using this system than Anquets.

The problem is that despite all of this quality — at the moment — it is Anquet that does what I want.

What Price Quality and Future Development

Neil raises some fair points in relation to the Anquet port, and we’ve already seen a strong of people here complain about the lack of transferability from PC to Mac. To this we might add the unsatisfactory nature of support — which is also touched on in my review.

In essence Neil raises the issue of whether this program port will be supported well and developed effectively. I suspect he might be right give that VP have not really taken the opportunity to build on the core of what has been ported. As a company that is primarily a games producer will VP be committed to developing a product? Well, only they will know that.

Waiting Until the Autumn?

Neil has the biggest impact on me personally when he tells us that Routebuddy v.3 will be out late summer/autumn. Although he doesn’t actually say it the strong hint is that height data, route profiling and OS Grid refs will arrive in that version. It would be nice if this could be confirmed but that might be a bit naughty of me — I might be putting Neil on the spot here.

But, assuming that the hints are correct, should we consider waiting? I think probably we should.

Routebuddy is a higher quality product in many ways. If it can deliver what we want then the performance comparison with Anquet will be easy enough.

I think we can assume that Routebuddy does have a proper route map for developing its mapping products — Neil makes the point that this is their business; they’re not into games.

Over the last year or so Neil and I have corresponded regularly. I’ve give Neil an idea of international mapping that I’d like to see on the Mac. Without breaking confidences it is clear that Neil and his colleagues do talk to other national mappers regularly and thoroughly and this makes me think that we might expect Routebuddy to eventually offer much more than VP Maps.

 

The clincher here for me is the missing features of Routebuddy 2. If height and OS references do appear then it Routebuddy will be worth the wait.

So, on the basis of the new information that has arrived today I would recommend hanging off from spending too much money on Anquet Mac mapping until Routebuddy 3 arrives. I just hope Neil is going to deliver what he hints at !!!

The final word, though, has to be on pricing. I said in my review:

“Routebuddy ask users to think about their map purchasing as their pricing can become more competitive the more maps you buy.”

To develop this a little, pricing does seem to change if you are going to be buying a lot of individual map sheets or regional maps. But this is an area where we all need help with price transparency.

I have bought two maps for Routebuddy. The first is the whole of the UK on 1:50 (£99.50) and the second in Stonehaven and Inverbervie on 1:25 (£19.95).

I have two maps on Anquet Mac: North West Scotland and North East Scotland and these cost £20.89. Should I have wished to buy the whole of the UK in 1:50 it would set me back £95.54.

The Routebuddy maps are better (other than the missing data). As I said in the review, they integrate absolutely beautifully. Moving from one map into the other (i.e. from 1:50 to 1:25) is done on the same screen seamlessly. Anquet doesn’t do this. Finish on one map and you (seem) to have to select the other separately. (There may well be ways of doing this but as others have said Anquet Support through VP maps is a bit weird and unclear.

But how many maps will I want to buy? Well, I might buy some 1:25 national park maps, Harvey maps or some international mapping (if it becomes available). Would this mean that I would by saving over time as against buying Anquet’s offer. Maybe. But who knows?

There may well be something of a classic choice coming over the horizon. Do you go with real quality design, good support and fully featured development paths? Or do you just buy the cheapest, more cheerful, option?

So, hold on to your purchases to see what Routebuddy do. It’s worth a wait of a few months or so. But I think there. is a price challenge for Routebuddy in all this.

But Neil, I wish you well!