Survey Results

As promised we wanted you to give an overview about results of our survey.

Answers are not perfectly representative as we published it on Twitter only.
Most questions allowed multiple choices. Thus percentages sum up to over 100.


OSM Buildings version

Numbers say Modern 3D Version is used by about 80% of projects.
Our impression is rather an even split between Classic and Modern versions.
We also got feedback that not everyone is clear about what version they’re using.

Application scenarios

Previous answers already indicate your application scenarios.
Data visualization leads with 70% followed by GIS with 60%, then Architecture with pleasing 17%.


Our hints were perhaps too much inspiration. So keywords are: textured objects, indoor, terrain. Also some VR and some more building details.

Project environment

There is a large base of 60% of personal projects. Followed by businesses with close to 40%. Another surprise.
Then NGO/Education/Research at 30%.


Sponsored features leading by almost 70% which is a lot more than expected.
Followed by donations at 60% and some acceptance for subscriptions.
Also seems like GIS people slightly prefer donations.

Project partners

Strong 50% opting for MapboxGL.
Others sharing the rest evenly and sadly we’ve had some fake votes in that section.


We’ve got overall very positive feedback and compliments.
This means a lot and it is driving the project!

We’re asked for some improvements on the Classic version here.


Many things were to be expected and that could mean no significant changes ahead.
But our competitors are currently ramping up and investing a huge amount of money.
Our resource is lifetime and we have to spend it carefully.


Adding heavy features for like terrain and textured objects would require large rewrites of the Modern viewer.
And then still it excludes potentially interested developers as code is very efficient but customized.

We could go with Cesium but these features are already implemented.
GIS features are not as present and data visualization on urban level is just bad.

We could go with Tangram but besides being very cool this leads nowhere.

We could go with ViziCities. This is an interesting option because of some overlap in data visualization ideas. Also ThreeJS is becoming more attractive to us. So far communication remains unanswered.

We could go with MapboxGL. Majority of you thinks this is a good idea.
We’re very split. It’s base map is awesome and recent integration of buildings seems cool.
But they’re currently at stage of extruded footprints. From what we see the engine needs similar rewrites just for more detailed building data and textures. And with aiming for car navigation, this is not their focus.
However, simple but effective mass building data visualization is very possible and it has all the GIS features we love.
Outcome: we’re hesitating to give the results away for others to make money.

With OSM GO there is another very new and promising project. It’s obviously under very heavy development but at an awesome progress. We’re in close contact and share many ideas.
It’s using ThreeJS as well which is undeniably good base to involve community.

For now we’ll go on with OSM Buildings Modern viewer. At same time we’ll assist OSM GO and perhaps join forces. MapboxGL remains on the list as well as our Classic viewer which we’d love to give some improvements.


Mapbox Vector Tiles are a hot topic today. Few of you know we’re using similar schemas since years.
There is now an option to join OSM2VectorTiles.
We’re not happy with flexibility of data structures and update frequencies.
There is a lot of data features we have in mind that will hardly fit current tool chains.
Our prospect viewers can already handle Vector Tiles or will be able to soon.
Thus our decision will be postponed.
However, we’re going to make data services more present on our website.
Commercial options will be removed except enterprise level.
From there it’s your choice: free user who are hopefully donating or a single commercial licensing option.


Donation options will return and be prominent. We’re curious how much willingness to donate there really is.
We’ll call for sponsoring bigger features. That worked particulary well for single feature/single sponsor: We’ll be trying a more crowdsourcing like approach now.

Last words

Let us know your option!

Please donate (PayPal).