OSMAnd vs. Organic Maps

Summary

There's a new offline mapping program for smartphones, so I thought I'd see how it stacks up against the one I'm already using. For clarity: I'm using the F-Droid releases of both OsmAnd and Organic Maps. I believe that OsmAnd charges for map downloads if you get it from other places. Both programs work most readily with maps loaded onto the device in advance (which is why I feel I should choose—I don't want to have maps for both taking up space). Both of them run off OpenStreetMap data, adapted into a custom format and published as roughly monthly updates on their own servers. Both have a tendency to let you accidentally rotate the map rather than locking north at the top forever. Both have vaguely shadowy and possibly exploitative governance. How do they differ? Organic Maps is much newer and generally less featureful than OsmAnd; conversely OsmAnd can feel bloated and over-complex. OsmAnd shows more information by default; Organic Maps is cleaner. (OsmAnd is ferociously configurable, though.) (All screenshots are taken on a Pixel 8 Pro; I've tried to line things up to make views as similar as possible, but any error is mine.) OsmAnd has standard map profiles; Organic Maps lets you bring in specific layers for "Outdoor", "Hiking" etc. OsmAnd has the full OpenStreetMap data for objects; Organic Maps only shows the object type. (The full data can include opening hours, not always reliable but useful to have.) Correction: Ilmari kindly pointed out that if you drag a thing which to me does not look obviously draggable you get the full data. His screenshot below on the right. OsmAnd has a water navigation mode; Organic Maps doesn't. (I don't often use this, but when I'm on a ferry I like to be able to see what's nearby in terms of buoys and other navigation aids.) Both programs allow one to add local place markers, and load them from a GPX file. OSMAnd allows markers to be different colours and shapes, and have different symbols in them; Organic Maps allows for a text ...