you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 1 month ago (12 children)

Also, unless you're using a paper map, you should never have to see a flat map projection.

We all carry around supercomputers in our pockets that can easily do the math to render a globe. If we want to use a bigger screen, they have even more powerful processors.

Does anybody actually use paper maps at all anymore? I guess sometimes people mount them on the wall and point at them, but I mean using a map to calculate distance, find a path, etc.

What's ridiculous is that even though computers should be rendering the world as a globe, some websites (even Google Maps) still sometimes use Mercator. It's especially ridiculous when it's something like a flight-tracking website where the flight is going in a straight line on the globe, but is rendered as a curved path on a stupid map projection.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    I mean the good thing about a flat projection is that you can see everything at once. When you're comparing data points of different countries it is nice to see them on a flat map. Neither the actual size nor the angles really matter in that case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    When you’re comparing data points of different countries

    Why would you need a map for that? That seems like something where a table is more useful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    It's more appealing visually and generally easier to navigate because you don't need to search a country on the list, it's easier to find it on a map

    To be noted: usually those maps are paired with a table and aren't made to give precise information

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    For most navigation people are going less than 50 miles projecting it onto a virtual globe would be pointless and not in any way shape or form beneficial.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    So, you're saying a more-or-less flat section of a globe should seem flat. Ok... and?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    You said

    "that even though computers should be rendering the world as a globe,"

    They shouldn't a projection is actually useful for most people in most instances. Your screen is flat and rendering a 3D image within it would actually mean you can use less of it and see less information in a more confusing view which would ultimately be weird and pointless to the people viewing mostly what is in fact stylized data like which roads cross.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    Your screen is flat, and the surface of the planet is essentially flat. If a program starts with a mercator projection and zooms in on a particular area it's always going to be a distorted view.

    rendering a 3D image within it would actually mean you can use less of it and see less information in a more confusing view

    Whaat? That's nonsense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Why do you think literally every mapping app on earth shows a projection onto the given x pixels by y pixels rather than a 3D rendering of a curved space again?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments