Dear tech journalists: your experience is not ubiquitous
I recently read with interest Thrillist’s tech article Why you should ditch Google Maps for Apple Maps. Mostly, I read with interest because the New York-based writer’s experience — and his reasons for ditching Google Maps — didn’t remotely tally with my own.
Among other things, he argued Apple’s public transport directions are “infinitely better than Google Maps”, search is faster and more specific than Google’s, you get a 3D satellite view of your city, and you can access up-to-the-minute train arrival times.
All of this might be true in New York. Elsewhere, it’s often a different story. Here in the UK, I’ve found Apple Maps has fairly poor intelligence when it comes to points of interest (or, indeed, often even searching for cities and towns), and little knowledge of public transport that doesn’t include London. Also, 3D satellite views of capital cities are a fun toy, but Street View (which Apple Maps currently lacks a direct equivalent of) has for me proven practical when checking out an upcoming journey and looking out for landmarks.
The point isn’t that Thrillist got it wrong. For some people, I’m sure Apple Maps is an excellent product, and one that enables you to avoid Google’s app if having anything to do with Google on your iPhone irks. But the article showcases a problem that’s especially prevalent in tech: forgetting that the rest of the world won’t necessarily have the same experience as you.
I’m sure I’ve been guilty of doing the same at times. I’ve certainly written enough tech articles over the past 15 years to practically guarantee that at some point I’ve written more from my own standpoint than empathising with a wider audience. But these stories when they arrive showcase a need for writers (and their writing) to be better, and to recognise their experience isn’t ubiquitous.