Out of Apple's Maps (or just - Maps) and Google Maps, which is more economical on data?

Google Maps caches the path to destination. I know this because I have searched for locations on Google Maps and then turned my phone data off. It still takes me there, minus the traffic updates.

I can search for my destination on Google Maps when I'm in a Starbucks using Wi-Fi, or when I'm on my home network and then reach my destination with no phone data usage, which is great.

On Maps, I have no idea myself and also there is no information about data usage online.

The specific cases I'm looking answers for:

  • Going to an address in the same city, which is better in terms of data usage?
  • Going to another city, which is better in terms of data usage?
  • What features can I sacrifice in one or the other so that I can get the most information with least data usage?

Update: I noticed recently that Apple Maps has also started caching. If you start the directions to a location and then turn data off, Apple Maps too takes you there. However, I have seen this only when going to a place close by. Not sure of the behavior when going to a distance farther away - like going to another city altogether.

  • I have no concrete information, but I remember reading the following information. First, Apple Maps uses vector images, while Google used to use bitmaps on Apple but Vector on Android. I believe that Google added Vectors in iOS after they were kicked off. Second, Apple maps has always been able to cache the map data en route, which was one of its best features. – Manngo Jul 15 '17 at 1:53

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .