Tim, there have been several discussions already regarding the accuracy of non-aeronautical features in SD. I understand the position of SD in this respect. Mainly, as I remember it, the argument is that increased accuracy in vector based maps would incur performance penalties and also increase the size of map updates. In my opinion, these cosmetic faults are just that: cosmetic.
However, the impact of seeing a road cross the runway twice has a substantial bearing on how a product is being judged by potential new customers. Just imagine a comparison in some online forum or aviation magazine showing these images. No matter how well SD handles other aspects like flight planning, user interface (a BIG cudos in this respect!) and positional awareness, a lot of people would turn around at this point and consider something else.
It is only the aeronautical data in SD which is designed for aeronautical use...
Sure, but when you look at the map while flying it is difficult to remember that you're not supposed to use any of the geographical features for aeronautical purposes. After all, SD covers all other aspects of flying so well that it has become a de facto replacement for maps, charts, wind triangles, weight & balance calculations, separate weather briefings etc..
Of course, we all want to have our piece of cake and eat it, too! We want snappy performance, fast download speeds for map updates and accurate depiction of all relevant map features. It's the blight of the software developer to find a suitable compromise and eek out the last bit of performance using clever data schemes and programming tricks.