I have 3 weeks to develop a prototype. Bascially a fleet management system, browser based. It will be tracking tractors in open country, using low data rate satellite modems to report vehicle location on a regular basis.
I am struggling to get a grip on whether I want to use Google Earth or Google Maps:
ease of implementation (PHP/HTML 5, pulling data from a MySql database)
tracking each vehicle, drawing a line, toggle display of time and/or distance travelled at each location
visual appeal to user (given that it is open country, no real landmarks)
available overlays (rainfall, temperature data, elevation, etc)
anythign else?
I am toally at a loss on the mapping part (the reast I can do). Is one of Google Earth / Maps "best " for me? (not wanting to start a religious war)
Is it possible to use both and toggle between them?
Any other advice? I am googling like crazy and might not normally post this question before doing more research, but the dealine is ricdicuous. I am look at 16 hour days and need all of the help and advice that I can get. I will will have to live with the decision that I make now and I don't want to make a hasty one based on scant knowledge.
Thanks in advance...
[Update] oic. Google Earth is PC applicaion and Gogole maps is browser based. Well, I guess that that answers that, then.
[Update] Sigh! It's another of those where the head of the company uses an I-pad but the end users have Windows desktops. So he wants it browser based "just in case" he wants to look at it (which he might do twice in the first week and then never again). Why does it always seem to be this way?
To identify the right solution, you first need to identify your target audience for your app.
Will the users of the web-based app be using desktops, iPads, or
mobile devices that have Google Earth available?
Will the intented users be using large screens located at the data center (Google Earth or Google Maps will work) or remote users in the field (Google Maps might be best better fit)?
Not all mobile devices support the Google Earth application and the
mobile devices have a limited feature set.
Google Maps API, on the other hand, will run on nearly all web
browsers for a multiple of devices.
See details:
Google Earth for Mobile
http://www.google.com/earth/explore/products/mobile.html
Google Maps for Mobile
http://www.google.com/mobile/maps/
Also note if you use Google Earth API you can easily mashup Earth and Maps in single web application but again this requires those platforms that support the Google Earth client.
Here's a sample demo to try out:
http://earth-api-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/demos/drive-simulator/index.html
Future proof your application. It is my impression Google Earth is on it's way out. It is hardly maintained and with browser makers actively discouraging the use of these plugins it is only a matter of time.
If you choose to use the Google mapping tools, do have a close look at Google Maps. Although Google currently offers a 3D version of Google Maps, it is not yet available for application developers. We are still stuck with 2D maps.
However, I expect that the maps API will not change drastically once 3D applications are allowed.
I am a specialist in the use of Google Earth API (planetinaction.com) and I have shifted from Google Earth to Google Maps wherever possible.
As an intermediate solution, you could build a maps based app but allow a 3D view option by popping up a Google Earth plugin. this keeps Google Earth dependencies to a minimum.
Related
I am about to start a new project which will be used about 80% through non-mobile devices like desktops and laptops and 20% through mobile devices. And yes, I want to use KML capabilities too, use JQuery for all my JS work and do not want users to download any plugin separately.
I have implemented two projects already using Google Maps API blissfully unaware of Google Earth API. Now I started reading about the two and nothing is clear about what is the right choice. I even referred to posts on this site so please do not mark this as a duplicate.
Google's documentation on Google Earth API states:
Welcome to the developer documentation for the Google Earth API. The Google Earth Plugin and its JavaScript API let you embed the full power of Google Earth and its 3D rendering capabilities into your web pages. Just like in the Google Maps API, you can draw markers and lines—but in 3D!
Well, with that statement from the horse's mouth, it confused me even more. Why would anyone use Maps API then. Can someone with experience in both these tools, give some definite statements for the specific environment I have described? The earlier posts do not give convincing answers.
I believe when I last looked Google Earth support in the browser is implemented through the use of Web GL which will severely limit your browser support and I think eliminate mobile devices.
While Earth may be prettier Maps is more performant and arguably stable and I would think it would be the logical choice for you in this case.
This page contradicts some of this but requires the use of a plugin which you specify you do not want.
For information on using KML layers with the Maps API see here.
Here is how I understand the situation.
There were two similar but different products co-existing for a long time:
2D Maps born on web
3D Earth born on desktop and brought to the web as plugin.
This caused a lot of confusion.
It would be beneficial to unite the two, but that only became possible recently with WebGL.
Last week Google released new Maps having Earth integrated.
Unfortunately, I was not able to find any documentation about this integration yet.
But, still, my answer is: use Maps and eventually you'll get Earth for free.
I manage the development of some academic web mapping software for authoring collections of geographic data. It's a fairly simple interface for creating historic maps. The project is based on Google Maps v.2, and because v.2 is going to be discontinued in 2013, we thought we'd bite the bullet early and upgrade to v.3.
It turns out that's a big job that requires completely rethinking how the map part of our application works. We have to rewrite all our custom Gmap controls, restructure several parts of the application, and a few other big changes--for example, v.3 doesn't integrate with Google Earth as well as v.2, and we use Google Earth a lot. Because of this, and because we're starting to use more features that Gmap doesn't support natively (like WMS maps), I've been wondering if it might be worth switching from Gmap to OpenLayers. From what I understand, OpenLayers has all the features of Google Maps, has native support for WMS and supports many more data formats, lets us use all the Google imagery anyway, and works with KML.
My question to the community is for people who know OpenLayers and Google Maps: can you give me an idea of how the workload for upgrading from Gmap v.2 to v.3 compares to a complete port from Gmap v.2 to OpenLayers? And what other downsides should we be aware of?
One of our biggest concerns: we use Google Earth a lot. If we went to OpenLayers, we'd have to synchronize Earth and OpenLayers ourselves, but it sounds like that's what we'd have to do in Gmap v.3 as well. From what I've read, OpenLayers doesn't have native support for Google Earth or any kind of 3D geobrowser, but there are some projects (like this) that try to bridge the gap. How much of a headache would this be?
Very interesting question!
Upgrade to newer version of Google Maps should be less time consuming because you already have working code and even though you make will have to make big changes you should be able to reuse some parts of the codebase. That's only my guess, because it's hard to be more precise without seeing the code :)
You should still take a look at OpenLayers. You mentioned that you already need WMS support and probably there are more features out there that OpenLayers supports and Google Maps doesn't. OpenLayers supports a wide variety of datasources, is open and follows OGC standards. It has support for Google Maps, and if you one day decide to change to Bing, Yahoo or your own maps you will only need to make minor changes to your code.
I was in the same situation. I took a look at openlayers and started implementing some of the functionality in openlayers. I was able to replace SOOOOO much google maps api code with just a few lines in openlayers. So i kept going, in no time i had re-developed in openlayers and cut down the javascript required to do so by more than half! I am also able to do much more! exporting, importing from all sorts of formats is now just lines of code rather than man lines. OpenLayers all the way!
I am a final year Computer Science undergraduate student from India. I want to create a WPF application that displays 3D buildings like in the latest Google maps 5 for android. This will be the basis of my final year project. I have some questions before i start working on this.
Should I make it desktop or web based, or should I use the web to store some metadata and render the data in the desktop software?
For 3D display of buildings in a map area, is WPF enough or will I need knowledge of XNA and Direct X too?
Will this violate Google Maps TOS if I use Google Maps API? (I want to do something Google Maps does not provide in India) Is using Bing Maps a better option?
Is it feasible to read building elevations and rendering them using the above mentioned Maps APIs? Is it that the elevation data available through Google Maps API is only for the terrain and not for individual buildings?
I have three months to complete this project and have given details of the technologies I intend to work with.
Will I need in-depth knowledge of any more technologies for this?
Excuse me if I missed some detail. I am posting this from my cellphone using opera mobile. It's time we have an android client for stackoverflow.
1) That is entirely up to you. As you don't specify your target user then it is hard to say what the best way to deliver the application is. For example, if you want to be able to widely distribute it and have a high compatibility then perhaps a web-based application would be best. Conversley, if you require high performance and are targeting a specific os, chip-set, etc then a stand-alone application may be better.
2) Again, it is hard to say. WPF can certainly render 3d objects and may provide you with everything you require. If again you require more complex rendering you may also want to look at later versions of Direct3D, which can help a lot with things like HDR textures, Multi-threading, etc.
3) I am not a lawyer so I can't say for sure - even if I If I were it would still depend on the specifics of your implementation. That said, the bing maps section 2 (i) seems pretty good for you - Academic use seems pretty open as long as you make the application available publicly without restriction. The Google TOS seems more restrictive to me at least.
4) To me that would be a breech of the Google Maps/Earth TOS - The section on Restrictions on use seems pretty clear...But again, I am not a lawyer so I can't say for sure...
I want to know if anyone who has experience of using both the Google Maps API and the Multimap API can give a good reason as to why one is better than the other - or maybe a list of pros and cons?
I will be working on a complete re-development of a site which currently uses the Multimap (Classic) API and want to consider the possibility of using Google Maps API instead of Multimap (now MS Bing), but I need a compelling reason to justify this decision.
The site currently provides a search mechanism allowing users to search for addresses using postcode/partial postcode or city. The current system has a sqlserver database back-end containing full address details and also uploads (geocodes this information to Multimap with a daily scheduled task). I'm wondering if it's possible with the Google API to avoid the need for the daily upload and just use it's geocoding API instead (though this is limited by Google's restriction of a certain number of geocoding requests per day).
In my experience using the two, Bing Maps are more accurate with regards to their geocaching, but Google have slightly nicer looking Road Maps.
The Google Maps API is slightly more helpful - for example, if you have 2 markers, the map automatically zooms out to the right level, Bing takes a bit more work.
Aerial maps look pretty much the same on both, as do the Hybrid maps.
My advice would be - use Bing maps for geocaching, then if you want really nice looking road maps, use Google. If you're using Aerial, Hybrid or Birdseye view, you might as well stick with Bing.
According to Wikipedia Multimap was purchased by Microsoft some years ago and its direction features were merged into the Microsoft Bing api. I suppose the Multimap API primarily exists for legacy purposes. By the end of 2010 multimap might disappear, so this is definitely a compelling reason to re-write the geocoding part of your app...
In any case I would contact Multimap how long they plan to support their API and if there is a migration path (probably to bing maps).
Bing Maps as well as Google Maps now offer real-time geocoding services over Javascript (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff710027.aspx for an example in bing). Which one to pick? Check the terms of usage and the costs of the geocoding requests per day.
Yes skip the old legacy Multimap and use Google Maps or Bing Maps. Both are in active competition and under active development. So one might be better in one area for a few months but the chances are it will change. Eg. Bing Maps was the first with multi-touch support (using Silverlight) but Google Maps now supports it with its v3 API. (unfortunately all but the most basic map overlays will crash Google Maps multi-touch apps crash with the most widely available multi-touch platform: Safari on the iPad/iPhone).
At the moment I think Bing Maps has the edge, but at the end of the day your decision is probably going to be subjective (those maps look nicer / I find the API slightly nicer / etc), or depending on the exact wording of the EULA (ie. do you pay? and how much? for your specific application).
You talked about geocoding. An increasing number of people are looking at using multiple geocoding platforms. Primarily because geocoding coverage of all the services are imperfect, but it also gives you cover if one service goes down.
I thought of using map in my blog. So which api will suit for me??
I am expecting that map should have more features. I dont know how to use it.. Sorry if my question is silly.
I need docs of both. Please let me know??
Both mapping API's are well documented by the respective parties, just google it and you'll find what you need. The MS Api is a little more restrictive but then the MS maps have better support for bringing up nice looking pop-up boxes etc.
The only real considerations after working with both are design and whether you need https support or not because Google maps will give IE users on https a nasty security dialogue pop-up that won't go away unless you pay Google $10,000 (but being for your blog I wouldn't imagine your fussed about that)
They are both pretty similar. I have used Google Maps API and it is very easy to get up and running and does everything I need. It also has street view which is a nice extra.
You should provide us more details in order to get a better answer but I will give you my thoughts anyway:
I have used the virtual earth API in a project I did in 2007. By that time we decided to go for the MS version as it had a better documentation and would fit better with our technology set i.e. MS SQL, .NET etc .... and best of all: it was for free!
Google at that time was offering a nicer UI for maps and stuff but after a certain number of requests you would start getting charged....
If you are developing in .NET I would certainly go for Virtual Earth now as Microsoft has shipped the official virtual earth sever side control ....
Some links:
http://dev.live.com/Virtualearth/sdk/
http://code.google.com/apis/maps/
Personally I think Virtual Earth is an inferior product compared to Google Maps with Street View. I haven't looked at either API but my experience with using other web based APIs from Google and Microsoft is that Google exposes a lot more functionality. The web is their bread and butter. It's a defensive action from MS. I love MS btw, so this isn't a hater ranting...
Pretty sure that MS Virtual Earth will require your users to download a viewer specific to actually see and interact with the map. The Google API will work directly with the browser. Really it comes down to what sort of functionality are you looking to include? if you just want to display various places on a map then GoogleAPI will work fine for you, if you want to be able to do an exploded view of a location from 3 miles away and then zoom in on it like you would if you approached it in a fast moving plane then MS Earth.
Google Maps API or MS Earth Developers