Iqaluit is a bit out of the way for most folks. Although I’m sure a nice spot to fly. But if they don’t also update the textures and DEM data in that area, adding a random airport in the middle of the sub-arctic with ■■■■ data surrounding it is a waste.
They’re likely also counting the ones we already have PG for too, so that seems rather unfair. 12 MORE cities would have been nice. There are already 10 Canadian cities with PG. So more than likely they’re adding 2 more.
They make decisions based on availability of data and also where their telemetry tells them that people fly.
I know that there are a lot of people who want to see other parts of the world updated. You may want to vote for some existing world update Wishlist topics and continue the conversation either there or create a separate topic in General Discussion, as this topic is specifically about Canada.
Prioritizing areas where data is available makes sense, but I think focusing on places where people fly can be a challenge because people may not fly somewhere as much precisely because the imagery is not good.
It’s a similar story in northern Alaska. The odd nice airport, but with poor satellite around it. Same goes for Svalbard - nice airport, but fairly grim satellite imagery. Makes you wonder if the imaging satellites don’t go that far north or are never directly overhead that far north to do very high res imaging.
Most high res imagery on Bing and Google Earth is not coming from satellites but survey flights (as in photographed from airplanes), which of course becomes more cost prohibitive the more remote and the more prone to bad weather the areas are.