Non-Google Fanboy Look at Google Earth 4.3
Google Earth really is starting to remind me more and more of the AOL of the early 90’s. Loaded with tons of crap you have to wade through to find the good stuff.
While pretty, 4.3 is a performance dog. Of course all the other digital globes are dogs, but Google has taken a step back on ease of use and speed. I’m sure they’ll get it back at the next release, but for now it makes me want to downgrade to 4.2. Does Google Earth have Google Goo in its Google Gears?
21 responses so far ↓
1 Slower // Apr 16, 2008 at 2:34 pm
that’s interesting that you find v4.3 slower…for me its soooo much faster than v4.2…3d buildings load soooo much faster for me now and the entire experience overall is faster. I’m wondering if its your computer that is filled with goo instead of the program.
2 James Fee // Apr 16, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Alas the Dell Precision M70 is probably getting old…
3 Christopher Palmer // Apr 16, 2008 at 3:14 pm
I agree with “Slower” - I was pleasantly surprised at how much faster 4.3 was and I like the new navigation tools (once I started get used to them). With most of the KML info layers turned off, the ground imagery loaded much faster for me than in previous versions. I mapped a route and then “flew” it and got fairly real-time tilings and fill-ins of previously unviewed terrain as I was flying over.
I do understand your comment about how much stuff is turned on by default - I wish there was a better way to threshold more of that. I usually just turn off everything expect terrain, boundaries, place names, and sometimes roads and keep that as my default. When I get to an area of interest, I’ll turn on layers that I want to see.
The street view scenes are a nice addition. It’s kinda neat how you drop down into the panorama or 360 degree view. In some areas, the imagery matches so well, it’s like dropping into a virtual reality view.
Also, the ability to “sit” on the ground and look up and around is nice, combined with the zoom in move that automatically tilts the horizon. Previous versions were very twitchy once you got near ground level. If you turn on sun and the cloud weather layer, you can get a nice effect of the “real” light and weather. The effect is very neat in an area with a lot of photorealistic buildings.
The sun option is cool itself, but I there needs to be an ambient light setting (if there is, I’ve missed it) so that you can see in the dark a little bit. The stars are a nice touch - I wonder if the sky map is real/integrated with the sky view?
4 Christopher Palmer // Apr 16, 2008 at 3:37 pm
OK, now everyone in the world must have downloaded the new version and started playing because my terrain updates have slowed to a crawl.
I’ll have to play again in a few days…
5 Brian Flood // Apr 16, 2008 at 3:38 pm
hey james
all the stuff turned on by default is the problem, they really need to rework the Layers area. that being said, 4.3 is faster IMO. It’s also (finally) a decent platform to build tools on. Here are some sample videos that show interactive tools (draggable directions, gmaps style streetview and some interactive animations)
http://video.msn.com/video.aspx/?mkt=en-us&user=308755822024637680
cheers
brian
6 Chad // Apr 16, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Brian:
How can you “build tools” on a closed platform where all you can do is KML to add content?
7 James Fee // Apr 16, 2008 at 3:52 pm
What can I say guys, this version of Google Earth is just a dog. Brutal is an understatement with everything turned off.
Could be my computer, could be my network, but the older version worked great this morning. *shurg*
8 Brian Flood // Apr 16, 2008 at 4:13 pm
hi chad
well, I agree that with just KML you are limited in what you can accomplish. However, you can use the GE COM api as a loader, insert some hosting code and then use an embedded http server to pump changes into GE . GETools does this for you and then allows you to create custom map tools (all mouse, keyboard events) and program against an api. GETools will load .Net plugins or downloadable javascript for simple tools.
We started GETools as part of a standalone Arc2Earth module (SharpMap, NetTopoSuite, FDO providers running inside GE) but decided that the base platfom had benefit to other people as well. You’ll be able to download that part for free. I expect most poeple’s tools will call back to services for the heavy lifting but there’s still plenty you can do locally
Its not even in beta yet so there’s a long way to go but rest assured, it is possible to host and run very customized tools inside GE.
cheers
brian
9 Tim Maddle // Apr 16, 2008 at 5:35 pm
I just downloaded 4.3. Performance seems to be fine. The new controls are acceptable, although the old ones seemed more intuitive. The imagery dating is nice.
10 Frank Taylor // Apr 16, 2008 at 5:41 pm
I also agree that GE 4.3 has substantial performance gains. Especially related to 3D buildings. For a high-density 3D building area like Denver it is at least 10 times faster loading, and the models run much faster (almost no perceptible slow down for my machine) once loaded. Not only that, but things seem very stable. I’m now regularly running with 3D Buildings on by default now.
11 Ed Parsons // Apr 17, 2008 at 2:55 am
So I think we should start a collection to get James a new PC, or maybe a Mac.
I’ll start with a Tenner (thats £10 GBP , $200 I guess
)
ed
12 Marc B. // Apr 17, 2008 at 3:34 am
Sorry, but I disagree James.
In two different computers, one +2 years old, and one less 1 year old (high-end performance), 4.3 is significantly smoother than previous versions in both machines. With terrain quality at 50% and anisotropic filtering activated (medium). In Windows XP Pro XP2.
13 Chad // Apr 17, 2008 at 4:29 am
(Walks past the kool-aid)
But still, compared to the other virtual globes, Google Earth is a real hog when it comes to resources.
14 Matt // Apr 17, 2008 at 5:39 am
I haven’t had the chance to evaluate 4.3 in terms of performance, but after reading the comments above it had me wondering if there are benchmark tests that could measure virtual globe performance. Semi-analagous to the benchmark tests PC Magazine runs on new systems.
Everyone is testing GE on different networks, processor speeds, net connections, graphic cards, etc. Are there any benchmarks that could “equalize” these comparisons to see if there truly are performance enhancements with future releases?
Cheers,
-Matt
15 Chad // Apr 17, 2008 at 6:37 am
I don’t think you could really benchmark all the globes on equal terms though. I can vary greatly depending on data being loaded and how it comes in. And what is installed/turned on.
But 3D buildings will increase memory and cpu usage. That is the nature of 3D rendering.
Probably the “best” way to compare the virtual globes is to just use them normally and track the CPU and memory use. If you are not viewing 3D buildings, turn them off then. Then just see how the system resources go.
That is what I did, and GE just ate up more resources than the other globes.
But still, looking at all the new features.. I honestly did not think any of them were that great and in some cases, made my “GE Experience” quite painful.. so how do you think “Joe First Time User” thinks? Will he keep it installed, or will he remove GE after his first use.
16 James Fee // Apr 17, 2008 at 6:39 am
@Marc B. You can’t disagree with me that 4.3 runs slower on my laptop than 4.2 does.
17 Christopher Palmer // Apr 17, 2008 at 6:59 am
I’m not sure what “Joe First Time User” will think, but GE continues to be a great “wow” program, an interesting exploration and learning tool, and a good platform for spatially integrating content from many different sources (via KML) such as photos, reference materials, current and historical events, historical map and aerial photo overlays, and very basic GIS info. Even features like YouTube video geolocation, which seemed kind of stupid and trivial at first, have grown on me - exploring travel videos of locations in other countries, for example.
From what I’ve seen, other virtual globe applications, even if their performance is better, lag behind in the wealth of available data and features.
On the other hand, being a GIS professional (or least I used to be), I am often frustrated by how difficult basic “real” GIS functions and procedures are to implement. Then again, GE isn’t really meant to be a professional GIS platform in the sense that something like ArcGIS is. Of course, a program like ArcMap is completely obtuse and useless to “Joe First Time User”, even if they have access to it.
18 Sean Gorman // Apr 17, 2008 at 7:44 am
I’m curious what the virtual globes are that perform better. I recently was doing some testing with loading decently sized KML files on thick client vertual globes - GE, AGX, and WW. Hands down GE was the fastest - AGX could not even zoom in to see the detail of the file without locking up. I have not played around with 4.3 at all, but in the rough benchmark testing I did on my machine it was really not much of a contest.
19 Chad // Apr 17, 2008 at 8:57 am
Well, of course GE would be the fastest, KML is native to GE. That is like saying a Word doc loads better and faster in word than it does in Open Office.
20 Sean Gorman // Apr 17, 2008 at 10:05 am
Actually they all loaded the KML just fine and in a pretty speedy manner although GE was a bit faster. I was commenting on the more typical user actions of panning, zooming, turning layers on and off. I still can’t get AGX to zoom in far enough to see the details of the KML I loaded into it. Just putting a little perspective out there as to what we are comparing to - at least in my experience.
21 Andres // Apr 17, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I’m with Sean on this one as far as general performance…though I have not installed/tested 4.3.
Hmmm….Maybe someone with enough time/resources can set up a bunch of tests to see if GE 4.3 is faster/more stable/etc. on various configs. Oh wait, the Big G probably already did that, right? Right?
@James I think the Big G knows all, and they have a little easter egg that knows when GE is running on YOUR box…some sort of payback or what not
Leave a Comment