Some of the places on the map are woefully out of date - in some cases, places which have closed, changed name, or opened since more than 10 years are not reflected on the map or in the options for a visit. It would be nice to be able to use more up to date data, or at the very least edit them
Hi @Aragost!
Arc uses Foursquare for its Places database. Though the place names you see directly on the map come from Mapbox / OpenStreetMap.
OpenStreetMap tends to usually be more up to date than Apple Maps or sometimes even Google Maps, but it does depend on how many volunteers are working on it in your neighbourhood. Anyone can get involved in the OpenStreetMap project, though I’d wager there’s a considerable learning curve.
For Foursquare Places database, check in the Foursquare app or Swarm app to see if the relevant places are in there. If they’re in there, they should also be in Arc. In the Foursquare or Swarm app you can also submit edits to existing places (eg if a place is now permanently closed, or changed name, etc), as well as add new places.
If you add a new public place in the Foursquare or Swarm app, it should be available in Arc within either minutes or hours or days, depending on various Foursquare user moderation variables. I think if you’re a regular user of Foursquare or Swarm your new places will probably appear more quickly.
For new private places (eg “My Home”, “Gary’s Backyard”), you can add them directly in Arc, by tapping “Add a new private place”. These places will only exist in your own private database. I often also use private places for minor places that too lazy to add to Foursquare.
Aside: Arc has always used Foursquare’s Places database because historically it’s simply been the best. It has (or had) the most places, with the most detail and accuracy. However a major reason why the latest version of Arc now requires a subscription is because the Foursquare API has gone from being free to being very expensive.
Which means I am open to the idea of changing to a different Places database provider. However as far as I’ve seen so far, the only other credible option is Google Places, which appears to be equally or more expensive, and at least historically was less accurate and detailed than Foursquare’s database.
For Arc to change to a new Places provider, it would have to be a significant step up, to justify a change that disruptive to users’ existing and ongoing data. I’m doubtful Google Places would be enough of a step up, if at all. But it is on my todos to investigate it in more detail at some stage.
hey, thanks for the followup.
Foursquare for its Places database. Though the place names you see directly on the map come from Mapbox / OpenStreetMap.
I can see why this happens, but I can also imagine this being confusing for users (why can’t I select the name I see on the map?)
OpenStreetMap tends to usually be more up to date than Apple Maps or sometimes even Google Maps, but it does depend on how many volunteers are working on it in your neighbourhood. Anyone can get involved in the OpenStreetMap project, though I’d wager there’s a considerable learning curve.
I’m aware of this, and I’ve been an OSM editor since 15 years 
For Foursquare Places database, check in the Foursquare app or Swarm app to see if the relevant places are in there. If they’re in there, they should also be in Arc. In the Foursquare or Swarm app you can also submit edits to existing places (eg if a place is now permanently closed, or changed name, etc), as well as add new places.
For Foursquare Places database, check in the Foursquare app or Swarm app to see if the relevant places are in there. If they’re in there, they should also be in Arc. In the Foursquare or Swarm app you can also submit edits to existing places (eg if a place is now permanently closed, or changed name, etc), as well as add new places.
this is where I find something weird. Let me make a concrete example.
There is a supermarket near where I live, and sometimes I go there. This used to be another brand, then changed in early 2019 and then changed again during 2020 to its current brand.
If I visit the place and open Arc afterwards, the map shows the current (correct) name - understandable, since I edited it myself on OSM a while ago. In the places list the supermarket has the first name, more than three years old. If I try and see on Foursquare I’ll see no supermarket, my guess is that Foursquare only shows restaurant, nightlife, public transport, attractions, but not “everyday” places. If I go to Swarm I’m able to check in to the supermarket… with the new name. After checking in, I can use the link from the Swarm app to Foursquare and see the same place with the correct, up to date name.
So, to recap, the place name is up to date everywhere (OSM, Foursquare, Swarm) but not in Arc. This is just an example, but there are many like this.
I’ll try and see what happens with adding new places, but for existing places something is out of place.
Aside: Arc has always used Foursquare’s Places database because historically it’s simply been the best. It has (or had) the most places, with the most detail and accuracy. However a major reason why the latest version of Arc now requires a subscription is because the Foursquare API has gone from being free to being very expensive
Which means I am open to the idea of changing to a different Places database provider. However as far as I’ve seen so far, the only other credible option is Google Places, which appears to be equally or more expensive, and at least historically was less accurate and detailed than Foursquare’s database.
Just to give you a data point, at least where I live, the Google Places database has been vastly more accurate and detailed for almost ten years, since when people stopped using Foursquare. Heck, even the places for Apple maps are more up to date.
Again thanks for the support and have a nice day
Back when I first integrated Foursquare, there was an API use condition that prohibited using it alongside another Places provider. So you had to choose Foursquare OR Google. I’m not sure if that condition still exists, though I think mingling multiple sources in the place search results might be troublesome from a UX perspective.
Very cool 
This could be due to Foursquare API v2 versus v3. Foursquare are trying to push everyone to their new API version, which makes use of their newer database (a combined database of their own and another company’s, that I forget the name of, who they merged with some time back).
Arc still uses the v2 API and database, because there are still significant issues with the v3 database. For example in my recent testing on the v3 database a few months back I found that all Thai train stations outside of Bangkok metro stations were excluded from API results and search results. So I had to roll back Arc to the v2 database for the current release, until Foursquare work out the kinks.
I’m hopeful to get Arc onto the v3 API before the end of the year, but we’ll have to see how they get on at their end.
Hard disagree. Arc is only about six years old, and I did extensive comparison testing of the major place database providers back in the first couple of years, and Foursquare was unequalled. Google might possibly win these days on business up-to-date-ness (though I haven’t seen that proven yet), but Foursquare has always won for breadth. Back in Arc’s early years Google wasn’t even a close second, and the rest were a joke.
I’d like to do some comparison testing again versus Google Places, because with the new high pricing it doesn’t make sense to stick with Foursquare without doing some more due diligence. But for Google Places to win it really needs not only be up to date but also broad - little things like intersections, bike stands, food trucks, market stalls, mall parking (as a separate place from the mall itself), e-scooter / bike share stands, etc, etc.
Arc supports visits as brief as two minutes, which means when someone goes to the mall their timeline isn’t just going to be “The Mall” (unless the user really wants to classify all stops as the one place), it’s going to be Mall Carpark Section B, Mall Toilets, Smoothie Stall, Supermarket, Starbucks, etc. Historically only Foursquare could provide that breadth and depth.
As a personal example, my condo has a gym, a pool, and a communal office/meeting space. Foursquare has separate Places for each of those (though I added the pool one myself), but Google Places only has one Place entry, for the condo itself.
If anyone is going to beat Foursquare these days, I’d bet on it being Google. But it has to meet a higher bar than just having commercial business data more up to date.