I’ve gotten this question from a couple of people (mostly probably because they want to see me say Google Earth Killer).
Lets get this out there right now. ArcGIS Explorer (AGX) isn’t ESRI’s answer to Google Earth. The reasons for AGX are tied very closely with ArcGIS Server (AGS). AGS needed a client application and since you can have globe services, AGX needed to be a digital earth application. That said, Google Earth has influenced the direction of AGX since GE became a household name. To create a digital earth application and not have it compatible with GE is not a good idea and ESRI has done their best to accomplish this. They also seem to have learned from the community and are supplying maps for users to use even if they don’t have a AGS to connect to. Personally I think both tools will sit on most peoples desk (at least those who can run GE legally). From a aerial photo standpoint, nothing will compete with GE out of the box. But the hope is AGX can allow users who want to combine data layers beyond KML on their client a way to do so as WMS, ArcWeb, ArcIMS, ArcGIS Server, Shapefiles, Geodatabases, KML and rasters are all supported.
If you want to know if AGX will be a Google Earth killer, then you aren’t asking the right question. The question is how will any of these digital earth applications (Google Earth, NASA World Wind or ESRI ArcGIS Explorer) help me get my tasks done better. The answer to that question is probably different almost every time you ask it which is why you need to make sure you understand how all three will help you work smarter.
14 Comments
So wait, you were just talking about how good ArcExplorer was and then you say it isn’t the best? What is it James?
I don’t see how there is any conflict Leslie. AGX looks like it will be quite the tool when it arrives. I always prefer to use the best program for my task rather than put all my eggs in one basket. Each digital globe is going to have places that they exceed the others and where they fall behind. Having all three on your desktop allows you so much flexibility.
That said anyone in an ESRI shop (especially those in the U.S.) will probably use AGX more. ArcGIS Server is the tool that can make AGX very powerful. We’ll just have to see what the community can do with the new tools ESRI is giving them and what ESRI can do to seed the field.
But how much is ArcGIS Server? ESRI Applications will win inside the GIS community. Google’s Name is Global now and Free. So wins overall on numbers. Nasa Word Wind is a big app but for the average user vastly over complex with commands that take most of the buttons on the keyboard.
Google Earth has made ESRI sit up and add functionality to is Application. hence the delays.. and finally to launch with release of 9.2. A public beta should have been released to iron out the ‘unknown’ bugs though.
We are starting to have applications that can cross each other networks. Like MSN Mesenger and Yahoo Messenger are now compatiable with each other. Hope trend continues.
How much is ArcGIS Server Basic? No idea yet. For some reason I never asked that question. (/me bangs head against desk).
As for a public beta, I can’t say for sure why it never happened, but you need ArcGIS Server at a point where it can be counted on for serving maps. Because ArcGIS Server has taken much longer than anyone thought, ArcGIS Explorer had to wait.
Yes you can use ArcGIS Server to serve up KML so you don’t have to use AGX with your AGS implementation. The biggest problem I see with this whole AGS/AGX combination is bandwidth. Think about it, if you host an incredible map on AGS that can only be viewed with AGX, millions of people might hit your site and go nuts. All these users will see is a slow progress bar on the bottom. That spells frustration.
From what they said during the technical sessions, the server products are tied to software maintenance. If that’s the case, the price of server ‘Basic’ will be in-step with ArcSDE, ‘Standard’ with ArcIMS, and ‘Advanced’ will probably be the same price as Server 9.1.
As for the exact price, none my ESRI contacts would guess.
So how does this all fit together. You mention that ArcGIS Server can serve up KML. Why would someone want to bother with Explorer if you could just have your clients all be Google Earth?
James:
I think the question that GIS types really need to ask is “what audiences am I trying to reach?” As KML/WMS support becomes a commonality between the different geobrowsers, the differences in user experience will become the key point of differentiation.
So while a GISer may be very excited about back-end integration with Server, they need to be sensitive to the fact that there is a large audience that a) won’t hunt through a “Tasks” pane and b) won’t have any idea what a task that a GIS tech has helpfully named “Multi-Ring Buffering” actually means.
Since you’re in the consulting game, you know that a) training is expensive and b) lots of people don’t enjoy the experience of being trained. GE’s sweet spot was the visual sophistication of slickly streamed imagery combined with an easy-to-use interface. So, personally, what I’d like to see in the geobrowser space is for usability to be as important to developers as brute functionality….
BT
Stan, I think the power of ArcGIS Server, if you use it, is that you can create web services that users can consume using different digital globes. KML is perfect for situations where people just wish to view data. If you wish to all your users more to interact more with your data, AGS in AGX is probably the better move. Of course you can still view KML in AGX (or World Wind) so you can deploy to groups that don’t want Google Earth installed for many reasons (including the license).
Of course if you client base is all Google Earth, you can serve up KML network links and not even bother with WMS or ArcGIS Server links. ESRI is positioning AGS as the tool to allow ESRI shops to share data with almost any type of user out there.
Brian, I don’t disagree with anything you say. I think you are spot on though when you imply that the markets of Google Earth and AGS/AGX aren’t exactly the same even though they do overlap. Nothing will change the simple fact that GE will be the easiest way to get out your data to “the masses” and even those who have no digital earth experience. I think though that anyone who has used GE will feel very at home in AGX even though they might not take advantage of any of the “added features”.
GE is great for viewing satellite imagery and Google’s net harvested data. AGX is good for analyzing private data and performing geoprocessing tasks and relaying the information to the user.
AGX is free, you pay for the server. GE is fee unless you want to use it at a business.
As for who would consider paying for ArcGIS server, consider a particular user at the AGX tech workshop from the UC who wanted to display MOLE (ESRI Military data) layers. This user wanted to cut off AGX from the internet and run military related logic solely from his intranet. AGX is made customers like this who want to export specific tasks for specific datasets to specific people.
The market is sufficiently robust to deal with both GE and AGX, and it really is a mistake to compare the two of them as though they are direct competitors.
I once had a quote for AGS at $24K.
Then again. . . It may have been $15K?
$24K is right…for 2 processors. Can’t remember what additional processors cost.
We have an ESRI ELA, so AGS won’t be any added cost for us.
But the other often avoided question is, what’s involved in actually, legally, getting GE for your enterprise, or can you get it in the first place?
I have found AGX so slow (to much!!!). Any other WMS program can access to any other WMS or WFS server much faster than AGX. Instead I have found that AGX have special spacial restrictions that help to obtain a map (or geographic) representation in a much more consistent manner than Google Earth.
2 Trackbacks
[...] After hearing more come out about ArcGIS Explorer (AGX) this past week some may be asking if AGX is a Google Earth killer. If you are one of those folks, be sure to read James’ recent post to find out why this isn’t the correct question. [...]
Short news: 3D London soon? ESRI ArcGIS Explorer soon?…
It looks like we can expect a fully 3D version of London in the coming weeks. I can’t wait. GoogleMapsMania points to BuddyMapping, a web app that uses Google Maps to let users build guestbooks for their sites. Comes with……