Open thread

Open Thread

October 25th, 2006 · 43 Comments · GIS

Lately I’ve noticed most of my posts get comments that are off-topic. Well lets try this… Here is an open thread to post about whatever you wish.

Tags:

43 responses so far ↓

1 Larry Renolds // Oct 25, 2006 at 2:22 pm

Wow cool idea, I’ll jump first.

I’m most worried about how ESRI is responding to Google Earth. I think James touched on it a little, but default maps in ArcGIS are just not good enough anymore. People expect the Google Maps/Google Earth look to all maps and unless you have access to great datasets, your maps look no better than ArcView 3.x.

I’m tired of getting called out by my coworkers who say Google Maps look better than mine, no matter how much extra work I put in it.
2 anon // Oct 25, 2006 at 2:39 pm

Great point Larry, I totally agree.

I’m losing out on cartography work, my organization would rather pay a graphics artist to create maps than let me do it with GIS. It ends up dumbing down the whole system when ESRI can’t deliver great datasets to their customers. I pay about 15k with ArcInfo and extensions, you’d think the least they could do is provide decent datasets for me to use.

Freaking unbelievable that we’ve put up with this for so long.
3 av8tor // Oct 25, 2006 at 2:52 pm

It is a moot point guys. Have either of you tried to use ArcWeb services in ArcMap? Slow as ass. With as many ArcMap sessions as you’d have during the day, no way ESRI could provide that kind of bandwidth. Google/Yahoo!/Microsoft could, but not ESRI.

MAYBE they could provide better LYR files to create better looking maps, but honestly I’d just rather have a web service as it would be updated more often.
4 Ryan Arp // Oct 25, 2006 at 3:36 pm

I think there are a number of basemaps (well, some lyr files at least) that come with the ArcMap installation. A default lyr file that is looks and feels like a GoogleEarth or LiveLocal would be nice, but different clients demand different fonts and basemap ingredients (which is why we add(ed?) value in the first place).

Ryan
5 Sean Gillies // Oct 25, 2006 at 3:38 pm

James, if you have a Jake Plummer voodoo doll: start jabbing and twisting. I’d like to see Jay Cutler start this season.
6 Erin // Oct 25, 2006 at 3:54 pm

Ryan, no way does the default lyr look like google earth. I’ve tweaked ours to look like GE, but it should be default IMO.
7 James Fee // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:07 pm

Jay Cutler? Are you kidding me? I’m not Jake Plummer apologist, but Jay has no experience on the big stage. He is no Matt Leinart.
8 Ryan Arp // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:13 pm

So wait, University of Phoenix has a football team?
9 Morten // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:14 pm

Well at least from my point of view ArcGIS is a GIS, not a map data collection. I don’t even recall using the data collections that comes with ArcGIS.
Well at least with ArcGIS server you could just add your own datasource and hook it up to Virtual Earth or Google Maps
10 Larry Renolds // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:18 pm

But Morton, you’d need ArcGIS Server. Lets just say that will never happen where I work.

I’d think the cost savings of not having to produce all those streets and maps cds would offset any added cost to ESRI.
11 James Fee // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:19 pm

Ryan, I’m an east valley guy so I don’t really know what goes on the over side of the valley. I wanted Pink Taco stadium, but no one listened to me.
12 Ryan Arp // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:30 pm

Larry, I agree with your comment in that there needs to be some sort of default data basemap to impress the consumers of our ESRI-based output. In my projects my data is very rich and well organized (well, at least to me), but find find myself getting raked over the coals because of poor label placements and the “can you make it like google maps” comment.

James, I think Glendale Stadium would have sufficed since the taxpayers paid for most of it (I could be wrong on this one).
13 MTGuy // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:32 pm

James - You are correct in that Leinart is no Jay Cutler. Cutler has without a doubt the best arm in the 2006 class. Cutler is going to be an outstanding QB. Plus he is lucky to be in an organization that has a winning tradition! Meanwhile, we have Jake and I like Jake the Snake.

Now to GIS…. Have you fired up Manifold recently?
14 James Fee // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:35 pm

MTGuy, I grew up in Southern California so I’m not an NFL guy. We had two Hockey teams but no NFL teams. There happens to be an NFL team here in Phoenix, but I’ve never been to a game (actually I’ve never been to an NFL game in my life). I’m more of a college football and basketball guy than pro.

Now, I’m not going to pay just to look at some product. Manifold = bad IMO just for not having a demo.

Even ArcView has a demo and that says a lot.
15 James Fee // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:36 pm

Ryan, the stadium was paid for by car rentals, not a dime came from Maricopa county citizens (unless they rented a car). Now I guess technically Glendale townsfolk pay for the police that move traffic around, but they didn’t pay a cent for that stadium. Frankly I’m glad i don’t have to deal with the NFL in Tempe anymore.
16 MTGuy // Oct 25, 2006 at 4:46 pm

I was just yanking your chain James…

If you find some time and a little spare change sitting around, take in a NHL game this winter. Especially if the Coyotes play the Avalanche. Hockey is a great sport to watch in person. It can be a tad bit expensive, but a fun way to spend an evening.
17 Brian Timoney // Oct 25, 2006 at 5:12 pm

Spare change for an NHL game?

I was “offered” a pair for tickets for tonight’s Avalanche: $105.00 each.

The most diplomatic response I could muster was “I don’t feel $210 worth of desire to watch live NHL tonight”.

So now my options–

1. Another boring World Series game with two teams for which I can only muster thorough indifference

OR

2. Watching hockey fights on YouTube

(Do I go for my own “Tie Domi retrospective” or “interminable bench-clearing brawls from the 80s”)

BT
18 James Fee // Oct 25, 2006 at 5:42 pm

The Coyotes play on the other side of the world now from me so I gave up my season tickets a couple years ago.

But given how bad they are it probably is a good thing.
19 KoS // Oct 25, 2006 at 7:12 pm

Georgia Bulldawgs!!

KoS
20 Chris C. // Oct 25, 2006 at 7:53 pm

am dolfin fanatic myself!
21 izo // Oct 25, 2006 at 8:09 pm

I wanted to write a bit about user expectations. No matter what you do the end user will always want more and more. Some of them are just greedy and the other half does not understant amount of work and resources required for the stuff to work like Google Earth.

Funny story about it … yesterday I was showing Google Earth to a friend of mine (female not very computer savvy ;-). I started application I’m zooming to show our house. Suddenly she gets up and runs outside the house screeming:
- “OMG !, OMG !… can you see me ? can you see me ?”.
- I say “What ? This is high res satellite photo “
- My friend visibly disapointed says “…. that’s lame ….I thought that you can view any point on earth live … “

That almost killed me and made me realize…
No matter what you do people always expect more ….
22 Jason Birch // Oct 25, 2006 at 9:09 pm

Beige is nice.
23 john // Oct 25, 2006 at 10:19 pm

beige IS nice, and i like olive too, a kind of pale olive that the ArcMap layout eyedropper tool sampled from the spring pasture of the solano county CA aerial photo makes a nice background for my legends.
24 Petz // Oct 26, 2006 at 1:55 am

Havent seen a mention of Manifold lately, well here we go!
25 what_nick // Oct 26, 2006 at 3:12 am

Here is my twocents from the worldwind community and as an imagery freak. Good maps are useful, but they are like long term memory, if you spend too much time making it pretty you will have to do it again once the data is updated. I believe the original folks who made google maps were based out in sydney, australia and were not ESRI lovers. Coming from a different perspective probably helped. If someone can arrange a good vector dataset the worldwind community is more than willing to make it pretty using open standards i.e. GML + SLD’s or whatever is most popular.
26 GeoMullah // Oct 26, 2006 at 5:28 am

TOGA! TOGA! TOGA!
27 Ben Slater // Oct 26, 2006 at 5:31 am

Anyone remember when someone started up a thread on the ESRI user forums titled ‘ArcMap Sucks!!!’? It was the most popular thread on the site until ESRI took it down.

Good times.
28 Chris C. // Oct 26, 2006 at 6:09 am

Hey Petz - my post did - I did a Dan Brown
29 Evan // Oct 26, 2006 at 6:33 am

Does anyone have or know where I can get some high-res versions of the ArcGIS icons? I use the large icon format on my desktop and everything looks great except for the awful ArcGIS icons.
30 Cam W. // Oct 26, 2006 at 6:51 am

I’m always amazed how few people (esp. non-GIS folks) use Virtual Earth. It’s superior in so many ways to Google Maps. Cartographically it is the best web mapping product out there by a mile. It is simply a better service than what Google, Yahoo or Ask.com provide. It doesn’t have the sheer amount of imagery that Google has, but in major urban areas where I’m sure 90% of the mapping is done it’s just as good (if not better when you include the Bird’s Eye data). On top of all that Google has the most restrictive licence when it comes to mapping data.

ESRI products in general have evolved (devolved?) into tool sets than anything else. ArcMap is a great product, but drop it on someone who has never used GIS and they are completely lost. It’s a totally different market. ESRI cannot compete with the likes of Google when it comes to making data (of any type) available. They don’t have the infrastructure nor do they have any realistic way of making money on the product. They are a software company, not a data vendor. They key for ESRI is to make sure their product can consume all the data that is available.

That’s then end of my rant… thanks.
31 S. Kobola // Oct 26, 2006 at 1:43 pm

Hmm, please do not take this as an offense, but in my GIS work we care about results that GIS provides and not about the look of the maps. However, I would not object if the layers provided with ArcGIS would be more appealing, although, I would not be using them anyway, because we have to have the most recent data and layers, so whatever is provided with ArcGIS would be very short lived.
32 Larry Renolds // Oct 26, 2006 at 1:50 pm

No offense taken, I too need to produce GIS analysis in support of environmental assessments and environmental impact statements. That said when it comes time to produce the mapping for the document, I’d rather use the GIS data than have some graphics guy destoy its usefulness.

As I said data provided by ESRI is pretty much worthless which is why I’d like them to provide a web service that would be up to date.
33 KoS // Oct 26, 2006 at 2:16 pm

IMHO, ESRI isn’t a data provider. They provide tools to use data.

Others are suppose to provide the data to be used in their products.

Do car or motorcycle manufactures provide/sell the gas for the product they sell? No!!

Do computer manufactures provide/sell internet access? No!!

KoS
34 Larry Renolds // Oct 26, 2006 at 2:22 pm

You do realize that ESRI is a huge data provider right? Much of their business is as a data provider, I don’t know the breakdown at all, but I’m sure it is at least 25%.
35 capone // Oct 26, 2006 at 2:27 pm

I’d say ArcWeb is based around ESRI being a data provider, I know because we use their datasets in our applications.
36 AVUser // Oct 26, 2006 at 2:57 pm

What I’m unhappy about is the ESRI samples at EDN. There hasn’t been one since they started the damn thing. I didn’t have high hopes for the EDN site when it was started and even those hopes haven’t been realized. They be better off just killing the EDN site and rolling it back into the support site.
37 Erin // Oct 26, 2006 at 3:03 pm

I’ll say something positive (and believe me that isn’t easy). I just got off with ESRI support and I’m impressed with how they have improved over the past year. It had gotten really bad about a year ago, but today was quick and painless. Not like it was 10 years ago, but back to usable.

Great job ESRI.
38 KoS // Oct 26, 2006 at 6:26 pm

Ya ESRI provides data through services. But did they originally created the data or received it from other sources?

When I mean provider, I meant the original source. Like example, NRCS provides or created the soils data layer. Anyone has access to it, they even could repackage and sell the data. But they didn’t originally create the data layer.

I don’t think the default data provided with ArcGIS was created by ESRI. It came from other sources(could be wrong).

KoS
39 KoS // Oct 26, 2006 at 8:01 pm

hmm no edit button. Would like to edit my previous post. Instead of typing once again.

Sorry, I don’t communicate well written. Perfer verbage.

But it is, what it is. This medium of communication.

Ok….back on topic. And to add to my previous post.

What made me more or less respond in the first place. The idea it’s ESRI responsibility to provide more(self created data) or even other source’s data along with the program(s). What about getting the data from other sources, besides ESRI? There are plenty of free data resources out there. If money isn’t an option, then there are always paid data resources.

If ESRI wants to, so be it. It’s their business.

Regardless, it doesn’t affect my life one bit. What is affected is the program(s) themselves. I guess I’m lucky or spoiled, I have access to almost any data(non-classified) I need or want. It’s more important the program(s) operate to its fullest potential regardless of the data I import.

Kinda like the car(ESRI) and gas(data) example I used before. I don’t buy or use a car because of the gas I have or want to use. I buy a car to take the gas and use it in the best, easiest and most efficient manner. I want the car to have nice functionality and features which get me from point A to point B. Now, if the car company wants to open a gas station and compete against other gas stations. So be it. I’ll get gas from the best place I can. Whenever I can, want or need to.

I can’t think anymore…it’s late.

KoS
40 Chris C. // Oct 26, 2006 at 8:30 pm

After the soup analogy a few months ago - lets go for the car analogy if ESRI is a Bentley (maybe a Microstation comparison would me more appropriate :)) a big expensive behemoth that guzzles gas. Manifold is a Toyota Hybrid built efficiently and kind on an owners pocket and the surrounding environment (clients).

I hope that doesn’t raise the IRES of the ‘real’ GIS professionals!
41 Ben Slater // Oct 27, 2006 at 5:11 am

I’m not so sure about the Toyota Hybrid analogy - I could go down to my local dealer and test drive a Toyota Hybrid for free any time I wanted to. No so with Manifold!
42 Chris C. // Oct 28, 2006 at 1:38 pm

Fair enough Ben, but looking at the price difference between Manifold and ArcXXX - if a Toyota was at a similar reduced price compared to a Bentley (working out at a very rough $9000 for a Camry Hybrid; in comparison to a Bentley Continental) I think I’d pay the dealer and drive it off the lot without worrying about not being able to get a free test drive.

Not that I’ve tried out a Bentley, which unlike ESRI products may be worth the high price - maybe some of the ESRI management can let us know
43 Mike // Oct 29, 2006 at 2:13 pm

“Now, I’m not going to pay just to look at some product. Manifold = bad IMO just for not having a demo.”

I’ve started to think that it’s a bozo filter. Some kinds of people are just not worth doing business with.