Travel apps fail to provide fast, safe routes for pedestrians

MacaoSmartGo displaying no solution to get to a destination [Photo: Renato Marques]

Back in 2025, Macau ranked among the Top 10 Asian cities for walkability. The ranking (ninth position) followed a government bid to increase walkability and encourage commuting on foot, taking advantage of the size and concentration of the region.

In the last few years, a series of projects aimed at facilitating pedestrian commuting for tourists and locals has emerged, one after another, to increase the willingness and habits of walking.

But there is something that might be jeopardizing such efforts: pedestrian commutes, particularly for those who do not know the place, need clear directions and guides so that people know where to go, how to get there, and how long it will take.

In a comparative test done by the Times, which put several popular travel guide mobile applications (apps) side by side, aiming to understand not only which one is the best option for travelers but also to understand their challenges and difficulties, all the travel apps tested (Google Maps, Moovit, and Macao Smart Go) delivered poor results.

MacaoSmartGo leaves stairs and lifts unaccounted for [Photo: Renato Marques]

In common, all apps failed to estimate with even minimal accuracy the time and travel distance between several points tested. Additionally, Google Maps more often than the others sent users through unsafe routes, which can put road users at risk and subject those who comply with the suggested routes to fines.

Examples of poor app performance include suggesting routes that clearly demand more walking than necessary to reach the destination, as well as failing to acknowledge pedestrian crossings, underpasses, and flyovers.

Another issue found by the Times concerns Global Positioning System (GPS) accuracy, which, despite affecting all systems and service providers, seems to cause more issues with Google Maps.

Consequently, low accuracy in the user’s positioning and the destination they are traveling to directly results in incorrect instructions along the travel route.

Moovit (at least in the locations tested) showed a better understanding of the land and existing facilities, despite several flaws. It was, for example, the only one that detected and recommended the use of the flyover at Av. do Dr. Rodrigo Rodrigues, in the vicinity of the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the Macau SAR.

None of the other apps detected the structure. While the Google Maps app suggested a surreal route through an impossible walk without breaching the laws several times and jumping over fences and into traffic lanes, the app owned by the Transport Bureau (DSAT) and recommended for tourist use (Macao Smart Go) did not offer any solution to cross the street and left users stranded.

Moovit more accurately identifies lift [Photo: Renato Marques]

In a similar case, only Moovit was able to acknowledge the existence of the underpass connecting both sides of Avenida da Amizade, linking the area of Jardim das Artes to the Sculpture Park of the Chinese Ethnics at Jardim Comendador Ho Yin, although failing to provide instructions on how to use it.

This happened while Macao Smart Go suggested a very long route that would require walking all the way to the underpass next to the World Trade Center building and turning back, which would entail a very long and unnecessary walk. Google Maps, once again, suggested illegally crossing Av. da Amizade on foot in front of the Shell gasoline station.

In several cases, the three apps committed similar errors, suggesting that pedestrians cross Rua de Luís Gonzaga Gomes at the side of the Rio Hotel, rather than directing users to the nearby zebra crossing.

In fact, of the three tested, only Macao Smart Go seems to acknowledge most of the zebra crossings and draw a route that points to the crossing in those locations, although no graphic or written instructions are provided.

The only app that provides consistent information and guidance is Google Maps, which indicates the next turn with a graphic and the distance to it. Unfortunately, this information is often inaccurate due to the failure to position the user with precision and to recognize pedestrian sidewalks and paths, essentially guiding pedestrians along known streets and roads.

While more accurate on routes and, consequently, on distance, Macao Smart Go also fails to recognize stairways, lifts, escalators, and other equipment, which, in turn, leads to errors in calculating the final distance and time needed to complete the route.

The same app also showed deficiencies in providing alternative routes and re-routing when a user fails to follow the initially designed route. In several experiments, Macao Smart Go only re-routed to the destination after very long periods off-route.

In this area, Moovit seems the least flexible of all three, insisting on the pre-defined route and offering no re-routing alternatives.

More concerning is that all three apps have guided users through unsafe and illegal crossings, some of them at the so-called illegal crossing black spots, where the Public Security Police Force has been enforcing surveillance and fining many pedestrians for unlawful crossings.

The Google issue

While providing accurate and reliable service in other destinations, Google Maps seems to fall short in these areas in Macau. The issue seems to be related to a dispute between the local government and the company that dates back to 2010, when the Office for the Protection of Personal Data, the current Personal Data Protection Bureau, refused a request from Google Greater China to resume activities on “Street View” collection.

The government entity claimed that the company had previously failed to comply with personal data protection requirements, including collecting images of passersby, license plate numbers of vehicles on the street, and unencrypted Wi-Fi network data.

In practical terms, this results in Google’s information about Macau streets being very outdated, which can contribute to the observed lack of accuracy.

Inconsistent language

Another issue detected by the Times during the tests involved language. While all the apps are set up by default to English, the language is often inconsistent, with some locations requiring the Portuguese name to be entered for searches, and, in some cases, information seems to switch automatically between Portuguese, English, and Chinese references (Google Maps).

Moovit mostly uses a dual-language approach, displaying the street or location name in both Portuguese and English, along with the name in Chinese.

In the tests, Macao Smart Go performed relatively well on English searches. In some cases, it offered confusing options for the same destination and even multiple options for the same location.