I’ve not really written anything up on Google’s KML Search because it really is irrelevant to me. One still can’t install Google Earth in corporate settings without paying for pro so why would I bother since none of my clients can install it (can you imagine if Adobe had such a restriction on Acrobat Reader when it started up?).
Anyway I’ve read what Directions Magazine and Ogle Earth has posted in regards to the new “service”, but Allan Doyle hit it on the head with is post, “Google’s KML Search – SDI or not?“.
Google paid for the development of KML. Google pays for the crawlers. Google pays for the servers that hold the data and respond to your search. It’s also open. Anyone else can crawl for KML files. Anyone else can parse them, and anyone else can offer a search service for them. But, until they do, the only way to geographically query KML is via Google Earth. To me that’s not an SDI.
Look, I’m not saying this kind of search isn’t needed and probably there isn’t anyone other than Google that could pull it off, but limiting it to KML and not fixing the licensing issues with Google Earth just leave a bad taste in my mouth.
13 Comments
James:
I second that emotion. After hearing whispers that changes in the EULA were coming, I just now tell clients what the licensing situation is and make clear that I don’t care what version they use since all of my back-end stuff works fine with the free version.
That, and we’ve started parallel development on Virtual Earth since paying based on usage tends strikes people as sensible and a CIO isn’t sticking his/her neck out implementing VE if a company is already chest-deep in MS technology.
Brian
James, James, James…always going on about the license. Troll, troll, troll.
I agree with Alan Doyle that anyone can implement their own KML search. In fact, in a sense, there are many Google Maps mashups out there which are implementing their own KML search capability by collecting KML files and location data and providing filtered results for a variety of applications. Same thing on the Google Earth side with network links. Things are going to get more interesting when the KML search is made part of the Google Maps API, and maybe Google will add search capability to KML itself. That would be interesting…
I’m assuming you are joking.
Frank, you head is so far up Google’s ASS that none of us take what you write seriously. At least Stefan over at Ogle Earth looks at things with an open mind. rolleyes
I have to run Google Earth at my company in a virtual machine because they block installing it unless we have a pro license. Me, the GIS Manager can’t run it. (and of course they won’t spring $400 for Pro, but that is a discussion for another day).
I like the idea of better KML search tools, but I can’t run Google Earth at work so I’d hope there is a better choice.
I’d like to see a “Spatial” tab on Google Search. Plus the KML could be previewed using Google Maps. The requirement of GE just kills it for me and my co-workers. I guess I can always play with it at home.
Sorry, poor choice of word. I was talking about your bringing up the license issue even though you know it is Google’s intent to change the license to address that issue. (Although, I agree with you it has taken a long time for them to get to it.) I just don’t think its a good way of starting out a story about a new technology by running up the license flag .
I just install the free version. Is google going to knock at my door?
Frank, the license issue is huge for me and I have been told my Google that they will fix it, but doesn’t it strike you as backwards to get the search working first and then fix the licensing?
The license is a huge issue for me and my consulting business Frank. I’ve had to hold back some really cool products from clients who won’t make the jump (and viewing KML in AGX or WW isn’t an option).
I don’t think the Acrobat Reader analogy really applies here, as all of the Google Earth versions allow for authoring. It’s fairly common even in open source software to have things like “free for non-commercial use”. The real problem is that people think Google Earth is free…Keyhole never was. You have to think it is all a result of the data licensing agreements Google has. I am sure all of the data providers in the world don’t want to lose sales without renumeration. Your average consumer wouldn’t buy imagery, but some of your commercial and government clients probably would. Hence, the requirement for a pro license for commercial use.
As far as the semantic argument about what constitutes an SDI, I feel such discussions are pointless. In reality, the architecture of HTTP from a REST perspective, combined with well specified formats for data interchange make the web itself a suitable SDI. The network link capability of the Google Earth client, and similar features in things like “web service” clients are really the enabler of that.
Things like the simple Keyhole BBS are examples of publishing frameworks. Adding spatial search to the web effectively makes the whole web work that way…I don’t see why adding KML search is so different, just an expansion of the capability beyond the basic data layers.
Something like MetaCarta is a better example of how the whole non KML web can be searched geographically, were it to be scaled to that effect.
“I don’t think the Acrobat Reader analogy really applies here, as all of the Google Earth versions allow for authoring.”
I don’t think it is one to one, but I’ve read that Google wants GE to be a browser. What browser that cost $400 ever did anything?
As for what agreements they have, that doesn’t wash with me. Microsoft has just as good data (maybe not as much) and they have a more open license.
Honestly I don’t care as NMCI won’t let me install it anyway, but the license agreement needs to be updated to reflect realities.
Larry: I guess the point is that Adobe uses the free Reader as an incentive for people to buy Acrobat and create data. There really isn’t that kind of model available for GE, unless you buy Enterprise and start serving your own earth.
I think you would agree GE is much more than a browser.
What’s the business model for Google that you would suggest? It seems like charging for non personal use of the datasets they have licensed is fair.
Now, I do suspect they might benefit from dropping down to a $99 price point…but I don’t have access to their sales data or licensing terms to see if they could make up the difference on volume.
Not sure how Microsoft is making any money on VE, but I believe they specifically paid for a lot of the perspective aerial photos that are one of their defining features. Still, I think VE is really cool…even this bit: http://preview.local.live.com/
MWH Global has forbidden the install of GE as well… It’s amazing that something that is so obviously useful and that purports to have such great open philosophy behind it is so painful to license. Oh wait… They’re just copying ESRI! Maybe next they’ll put a more complete subscription service around it and descope it’s capabilities… ArcGoogle anyone?
Hi James can you please make a live forecast?I thought it would be cool if I could just type in a adress and see someone out side if you have a chance to write me back I would like that.Thank you!
One Trackback
[...] by cholmes on May 13th, 2007 So I’ve been slow on the uptake, as the geo blogosphere’s conversation about Google’s KML Search‘ took place awhile ago. Mostly because I’m only about [...]