|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | RE: GISList: Compressed Terrain Data |
| Date: |
01/07/2003 11:20:55 AM |
| From: |
Karen Morley |
|
|
just to clarify - I said non-proprietary solutions - not software - the
solution being a mechanisms to share data not software.
Also, I think we're all biased in some way - you, Anthony, being a business
partner of manifold, me being a software vendor. I do take umbrage to the
broad and sweeping potshots taken at software other than his own. I've
never said that manifold is not good software but that doesn't mean it's the
only good software, nor is it the only software company that's responsive.
When software packages have literally millions of users, vendors must make
decisions about which new features to implement. When your users number in
the hundreds or thousands, it's a heck of a lot easier to add all of their
requests.
Unfounded attacks and speculation on software vendors only serve to confuse
issues and spread rumors.
I think it's great that this forum is being used to gauge interest in new
solutions, some which may work and some which may not. I wouldn't sign up
to be a reseller either but more power to the small guys. Microsoft was
small and responsive once, too.
-Karen
-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Quartararo [mailto:ajq3@spatialnetworks.com]
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 11:31 AM
To: gislist@geocomm.com
Subject: RE: GISList: Compressed Terrain Data
Good points made here. But, OGC is NOT trying to create non-proprietary
software. As we beat that horse to death twice, they allow participating
vendors to keep their IPR secret and just provide a way for another layer to
access that proprietary stuff and then give it to another application. In
fact, there is no such thing as software without an EULA. Even Linux has an
agreement to use "free" source code. Next subject. I don't think it's a
matter of anyone really being afraid of anything (although my recent
benchmarking with ArcGIS 3D Analyst scares the daylights out of me), but
suggesting that someone would or should put Gb or Tb of data into a format
that is by default, a single point of failure, IS very scary. Granted,
someone will probably make a decision to that and succumb to otherwise great
sales presentations. Caveat emptor.
Aside from the rather bold nature of Dimitri's posts, his logic and
arguments are difficult to ignore. What may be portrayed as thinly-veiled
marketing efforts on his part in the fairly regular references to his own
product could actually be the only real point of reference for his
arguments. What I mean is that his product is what he says it is, not
without faults, but anyone hanging on the manifold-list at Directionsmag.com
knows the responsiveness to user feedback in terms of product enhancements,
etc. I know of no other vendor that can respond to individual feedback and
see it manifest itself in the next release, no one, hands down. And so,
there is nothing to really compare it to, on an apple-to-apple basis, so of
course he references his own product in making his arguments. It would be
pointless to refer to "conceptual" arguments when real applications exist
that back it up. Enough on that for now.
Hey, if Mr. Crum wants to burn cash in an effort to develop, market,
support, improve this product, more power to him, knock yer socks off. But,
given the benefit of the doubt, conduct market research on the list and then
request the list to email in private, thereby denying the list the
interaction of responses. Oh, and no, not interested in becoming a reseller.
Anthony
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Morley [mailto:kmorley@lizardtech.com]
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 1:41 PM
To: 'David Nealey': dar@manifold.net: gislist@geocomm.com
Subject: RE: GISList: Compressed Terrain Data
I have to finally jump in here. Some on this list blatantly use this forum
to espouse their own GIS products while trashing all other offerings. First
criticizing OGC for trying to create non-proprietary solutions and then
condemning software that has proprietary file formats in a manner that is
anything but humble, despite the protestations to the contrary.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Business is about making money. You get what
you pay for and the technology advances accordingly. Just because you give
something away doesn't mean anyone will want it. In fact, the MrSID file
format native support in more applications than any other, including ECW.
The licensing is not draconian as implied in this thread, that is simply a
marketing fallacy perpetrated by ERM.
And indeed as David indicates, ERM has had as many layoffs as LizardTech, it
just wasn't publicized because no one cares.
Finally, a really good solution may have a proprietary file format but so
what? How many people are afraid of converting their data to shp files or
dwg files - both proprietary but widely recognized and handled. How many
applications recognize a .map extension?? hmmm...that must be proprietary
too.
-Karen
-----Ori
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
