
I tested Waze vs. Google Maps for a weekend trip — and there's a clear winner
There have been several apps that help you find your way around, but obviously the most well-known is Google Maps. However, while Google might be the most well-known, there are a couple of competitors, including Apple Maps. However, there is a third option, and it's one that I never really considered: Waze.
For some reason, I never really bothered with Waze, partially because I am one of those people who never really change my app when I find one that works. I've been using Google Maps to chart my journey for years, but could it be time for a change? I decided to test the two apps to see which is better for me.
To do this, I took both apps and had them navigate an hour-long trip for me, to see which offers the best information and the best overall route. I also wanted to see what the difference was in settings and what was unique about each app, even though both are owned by Google.
I never really considered 'setting up' to be a part of a map app, but as it turns out, I was wrong when it comes to Waze. The app is full of options and features, including being able to add a variety of voices to relay directions to you. I have to say, having the option to have Halo's Master Chief was certainly novel, although it was odd that Cortana wasn't an option.
Not only that, you can create a full profile on Waze, including a user name, that other people can see when on the app. Honestly, this addition is just confusing to me. Why would I want people whom I don't know to know where I am, and what speed I was going? On top of that, I'm not entirely sure why I would need to know that other people are using the app, other than Waze just showing off. Thankfully, you can turn this option off, which is the choice I went with.
Google is much simpler, and doesn't really worry about you needing a profile or showing you other drivers.. There are some voice options, but honestly, I usually turn them off as they interrupt whatever you're listening to on Apple Music or Spotify. You can also set your home address, as well as your office and other sites you constantly visit, but that's about it.
Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
The first thing I have to mention is that Waze is entirely about driving, so it doesn't offer directions for taking public transport or even walking. Meanwhile, Google Maps is a lot more comprehensive, even if the London Underground's hectic schedule faults and issues can make it have a digital migraine.
With that said, both services claim to offer up-to-date traffic information, although Waze has it constantly visible, which I honestly prefer. This allows for more planning, but it can make the actual screen a bit too cluttered, which led me to worry a bit more about issues that I would never see. Meanwhile, Google makes you aware of certain points of interest in your journey, like speed cameras, but doesn't indicate them outside of your route.
Both apps also offer digital speedometers, although neither was all that accurate. I wouldn't recommend telling the police that your map app said you were going 50, no matter how convincing you try to be. One thing Waze does offer is up-to-date parking information and if you've ever tried to park in London, this can be a real lifesaver.
However, Google has one advantage in that it offers satellite imagery of the area around you, alongside street view. This can be a big deal when your friend forgets to tell you his address and says, 'It's the red house.' Google Maps can also work offline if you download the specific areas of the map onto your device. It's not ideal, and useless if you're in an emergency in an area you didn't download, but it's a nice option to have.
So what was the drive actually like and how did the journey go? Honestly, the actual directions were pretty comparable, although Waze can get a bit confused when it comes to roads with restricted lanes. However, for the most part, they both got me where I needed to go.
I will note that Google Maps does tend to take me on strange diversions, especially on longer journeys, which can be a bit of a pain. For instance, it decided I should leave a motorway, to then go straight back on the motorway a second later. It was tedious, and didn't happen nearly as much as on Waze. However, having a colored, detailed map was preferable to me over the stagnant white map that Waze uses.
Meanwhile, Waze tended to avoid too much detail when it came to the roads, which is odd considering how much other stuff was rammed on the screen. This not only makes the screen look really cluttered, but it also makes it harder to focus on the route I am meant to be taking, which can be a bit confusing. The good news is that you can limit what you see on the map and I think you really should.
However, one thing both do is ask if certain issues are still there, like a camera. I don't know who decided that having that was safe, but you can turn off the option in the settings (although it's on by default.) Thankfully, both apps have been updated to allow you to use your voice.
At the end of the day, both Waze and Google will get you from point A to point B. The main difference is in the presentation. Google is more utilitarian and allows you to go far more in-depth with your journey options, picking the best one for you.
Meanwhile, Waze offers a lot more personality, including the ability to pick interesting voices while also working to keep you up to date. It's ideal for anyone looking for more personality and color in their apps, especially if you rely on having a voice tell you where to go.
Overall, Google Maps' options and the ability to use it offline (with some extra steps) help it earn the win for me. I also find all the added icons with Waze to be so much noise and irrelevant to what I want from a navigation app.
A lot of this is down to personal preference, so let me know which app you prefer right in the comments.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Android Authority
16 minutes ago
- Android Authority
Google Messages now ensures you don't get flashed without your consent
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority TL;DR Google Messages will now automatically blur NSFW photos that you receive or send. It will show warnings before opening any explicit media shared with you to ensure you approve of it. It will also warn you of the risks of sending such photos before you do. All processing takes place locally on your device, so none of the private media is sent to Google. The outpouring of multimedia junk, thanks to RCS, in Android's default Messages app has inspired Google to bolster it with extensive spam protection. Now, it is expanding its protection features to any NSFW (Not Safe For Work) media you might receive in your inbox, with or without soliciting. Google Messages is gaining 'Sensitive content warnings' that will notify you when you receive a picture of someone naked. The feature, first announced in late 2024 and then rolled out in beta earlier this year, is now available to all users, as noted by 9to5Google. When the feature is enabled, the images will be automatically blurred to save you from any public embarrassment, even if they were meant for you. It will give you another set of 'Yes' and 'No' options when you first tap the image to ensure you open it mindfully. If you are uncomfortable viewing the picture, you can also delete it without revealing its contents, or block and report the sender. Google says nudity in pictures will be identified with an Android system feature called SafetyCore. The analysis and processing happen locally, so you wouldn't have to worry about any private media being sent to Google. There is currently no protection for other media, such as GIFs or videos, possibly because of their larger sizes, although Google is already testing support for them. Don't want to miss the best from Android Authority? Set us as a preferred source in Google Search to support us and make sure you never miss our latest exclusive reports, expert analysis, and much more. In addition to protecting you against any unwanted explicit images, Google will also warn you of the implications when you send a picture with nudity to another person. Google is adding a link to a resource that apprise you of the risks of voluntarily sharing nude images, which can later be used to harass you or cause anguish. Meanwhile, the resource also notes the repercussions of sharing anyone else's images without their consent. While the feature is going live for a broad set of users, you might have to ensure that it is turned on and that Android System SafetyCore is installed. To do that, head over to the Google Messages app and tap on your profile picture on the top right. Next, go to Message Settings > Protection & Safety and tap the area that says 'Manage sensitive content warnings.' On the page that opens, you might be asked to download SafetyCore before enabling the feature. Once installed, you can toggle these warnings on or tap the 'Visit resources' link at the bottom to view risks associated with sharing nude images through messages. In a dedicated support page, Google notes that the sensitive content warnings are turned on by default (once you set up SafetyCore). While adults (18+ in age) can turn it off, it can only be managed by parents for 'Supervised' teens who have their accounts managed by the Family Link app. Meanwhile, unsupervised teens (aged 13–17) will also have the option to turn it off themselves. While it's good to see Google Messages bring a crucial feature, it doesn't quite extend as far as the Sensitive Content Warnings on iOS, a feature that blocks every NSFW media (including videos) shared across multiple apps, such as Messages, Contact Cards, FaceTime, and even AirDrop. Follow


Forbes
17 minutes ago
- Forbes
Delete Any App On Your Smartphone If You See This On Screen
Even as Google and Apple make headlines with new security features for Android and iPhone, the mobile threat landscape has never been worse. Your phone is under attack from malicious texts and emails, malware-laced apps, even over-the-air threats. Some of this is hard to detect. But one message on screen is a glaring red flag. It's fairly straightforward to ensure your phone — the digital key to your life — is better protected. Do not click links or download unexpected attachments; do not install apps from outside official stores; and always run an updated version of the phone's OS. It should be that simple, but it's not. There are upwards of a billion smartphones that are running outdated operating systems that no longer receive security updates. Sideloading apps from emails, messages and third-party stores remains popular. And hardly a week goes by without news of new text or email attacks claiming victims. But there is one safeguard that really is simple. It stops attackers hijacking devices and taking control of your cameras and microphone. It prevents current threats such as LumaSpy and PlayPraetor from carrying out their worst. And it makes it immeasurably more difficult for bad actors to run riot on your device. We're talking accessibility services, permissions which grant wholesale access to a phone. 'Your app must use platform-level accessibility services only for the purpose of helping users with disabilities interact with your app,' Google says. But alas this is the golden ticket for malware developers. All they need to do is trick you into saying yes. The 'power' of these accessibility services is such that 'very few official apps will mess with it for fear of attracting the wrath of Google,' Bitdefender says. But unfortunately, 'malicious apps don't have the same qualms,' and 'many types of malware will try to gain access to this permission as a way to take over control and monitor devices.' Google has locked down accessibility services. But 'the security enhancements aimed at limiting abuse of Android's accessibility services have been systematically circumvented by sophisticated malware loaders. This has enabled a new generation of banking trojans, keyloggers, and remote access tools to persistently target users.' The screenshots above (courtesy of Zimperium) illustrate what you need to look for. Any app you have installed that asks for 'full control' is a serious risk. Unless you have downloaded an app that requires control of a device given your own personal needs, it's dangerous to grant these permissions. You should delete the app.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Could Perplexity's $34.5 Billion Offer for Chrome Ignite the Biggest Shift in Search Since Google Itself?
Key Points Perplexity is a start-up competing with ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs). The company has a smaller market presence compared to other tools, and it is seeking to bolster its competitive positioning. Perplexity actually ranks some of its queries on Google as webpages, making its pursuit of the Chrome asset both savvy and calculated. 10 stocks we like better than Alphabet › On the eve of OpenAI's launch of ChatGPT-5, rival start-up Perplexity raised the stakes in a way few saw coming. On Aug. 12, reports surfaced that Perplexity is going after one of Alphabet's (NASDAQ: GOOGL) (NASDAQ: GOOG) crown jewels: the Chrome search browser. This is more than a symbolic transaction: it's a $34.5 billion offer to completely transform how information is accessed. Let's discuss why this acquisition offer is so important, and what it could mean for the dynamics of internet search -- which hasn't witnessed serious, existential disruption since Alphabet released Google nearly three decades ago. What is Perplexity? Launched in 2022, Perplexity is a large language model (LLM) that competes heavily with industry leaders such as ChatGPT, Anthropic, DeepSeek, Mistral AI, and xAI's Grok. Backed by more than $1 billion in capital from a mix of venture capital (VC) firms such as Bessemer Venture Partners and New Enterprise Associates, as well as strategic backers like Nvidia, SoftBank, and Databricks, Perplexity boasts a reported valuation of $18 billion -- making its offer for Chrome even more outrageous. According to data compiled by FirstPageSage, ChatGPT is the most widely used chatbot -- boasting an estimated 60% market share -- while Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini each hold about 14% market share. Perplexity ranks fourth with about half the market presence of Copilot and Gemini. One of Perplexity's differentiators over other LLMs is that answers to queries can actually appear as indexed webpages on Google Search -- a feature that blends both conversational AI and traditional search protocols. This capability could be one of the core inspirations surrounding Perplexity's interest in owning Chrome. Ironically, I recently wrote an article in which I posited the idea of Apple acquiring Perplexity and integrating the LLM into its Safari search browser. Chrome is far more valuable than Safari, though. Strategically speaking, I understand the theoretical logic and rationale behind why Perplexity wants Google's coveted search asset, as Chrome serves as a distribution channel for billions of users on a global scale. Why Perplexity's offer is important While Alphabet's second-quarter earnings results suggest the company still has enormous leverage when it comes to surface area on the internet, the rise of LLMs has led some industry experts to posit the idea that Google is losing its dominance in search. I suspect that any hint of waning search parameters or a crack in Google's moat gave Perplexity an excuse to try to capitalize on perceived weakness. In a scenario where Alphabet actually divested Chrome -- as unlikely as this is -- it would represent the first seismic shift in search since Google took the throne away from early disrupters such as Yahoo and Ask Jeeves (now My prediction for what will happen While I think Perplexity's offer is more symbolic than anything, it does open the door to some interesting discussions. What I mean by that is AI developers no longer seem to be satisfied touting higher user engagement stats and nominal upgrades in performance. Rather, Perplexity and its peers are now seeking to integrate (or overtake) big tech's legacy product features and own the distribution channels on which consumers engage and access information. If Perplexity were to be the sole operator of Chrome, it could essentially redirect traffic on the internet into its native AI-driven ecosystem. I think Perplexity's bid for Chrome will ultimately motivate Alphabet to think defensively and deliver on some welcomed and potentially much-needed innovation to the search market -- which it essentially has a monopoly on. I would not be surprised if Alphabet swiftly integrates more of Gemini's generative AI capabilities across its entire ecosystem -- from Google Search, Maps, Workspace, Android, and YouTube. Taking this a step further, Alphabet could push harder in driving more enterprise subscriptions for Gemini, much in the same way Microsoft has done with Copilot. The end goal for Alphabet should be to make its AI so embedded that it eliminates the very idea of entertaining other platforms. At the end of the day, Perplexity's offer for Chrome is intentionally bold, and I don't think Alphabet is going to even blink. With that said, should AI-powered browsers emerge as the next frontier for LLMs, there is no company better-positioned than Alphabet. The bigger question is how the company will take advantage of its lucrative positioning, and whether or not it will do so proactively or wait for further competition to force its hand. Should you buy stock in Alphabet right now? Before you buy stock in Alphabet, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Alphabet wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $653,427!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,119,863!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,060% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 11, 2025 Adam Spatacco has positions in Alphabet, Apple, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Apple, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Could Perplexity's $34.5 Billion Offer for Chrome Ignite the Biggest Shift in Search Since Google Itself? was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio