Clearflow from maps.live.com.

So Microsoft recently released this new technology that added to their mapping system that gives you the ability to route you around traffic backups that occur on the highways. Previously, mapping systems could not do this because there was no guarantee that the surface streets would have any less traffic than the highways. How microsoft implemented this (apparently) is they analyzed traffic data on surface streets around seattle and came up with models that are supposed to help predict when / where backups would occur on city streets. Then they can use this model to generate information that would allow their route calculation engine to determine which route would get you to the destination the quickest.
Sounded like a good idea to me so I thought I would give it a try. Here are my results:
Try #1: Clearflow cost me 20 minutes - Didnt calculate the time it would take to get through a timed-onramp light.
Try #2: Ontime
Try #3: 20 minutes late - No signification cause... just heavy traffic along the route.

Overall it has cost me more time than it has saved. Although it does seem to work sometimes, I wonder if it is a fluke or if the "model" they are using is actually correct.

Why I wont use it in the future? If it can't anticipate on-ramp blockages then I have no need for it in a city where you need to eventually get on the freeway. Additionally, I wonder how this system scales up nationally. If Microsoft cant accurately predict how traffic is going to flow it it's own city, how could it work in other cities?

To me it seems like money was spent on a technology that Microsoft wanted to get back so the solution is more "hype" than anything else. If it doesnt work, why make it available?