|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | GISList: how you say it matters |
| Date: |
01/26/2003 07:40:15 PM |
| From: |
=?big5?B?Z2FyeV9odWJicyAgICAgICAgICAgILBxrGa0tQ==?= |
|
|
At the risk of restarting the arguments, let me just say when I read a
posting where the writer expresses his "opinion" with works like "sucks" and
"blowhard" I immediately tend to assume the writer is actually the one who
is an "&$&*#!@%$&". It still amazes me how aggressive some people can get
when writing on Internet forums, if they expressed the same opinions
face-to-face they probably would get a punch in the nose !
We all know definite Dimitri has definite, strong and (perhaps)
somwhat-biased opinions, but I think he has contributed more to this list
than anyone else I can think of, and always in a literate and polite manner.
- Gary Hubbs
-----Original Message-----
From: Dimitri Rotow [mailto:dar@manifold.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 1:11 AM
To: gislist@geocomm.com
Subject: RE: GISList: Re: GIS P2P * Market Research Question *
Hello Everyone,
I'd like to thank everyone who sent messages of support. It's a shame if
this list deteriorates into flames for a while, but that wouldn't be the
first time that's happened in cyberspace. I've participated in many lists
and newsgroups since 1985 (18 long years, going back to USENET) and the
dynamics of such things haven't changed one whit. The list will bounce
back.
In the meantime, I would advise the flamers to consider if their flames are
counterproductive to their cause, if, in fact their cause is to prevent
certain product names from being used in public conversation. Whether that
is because their business or personal interests are threatened by the
ongoing change in GIS, or because they simply want to discourage what they
see as inappropriate "marketing" that uses specific product names in posts
is beside the point. Don't be foolish enough to start naming product names
if someone else hasn't posted those product names you don't want to have
heard,
In the present case, my original post mentioned no product names at all. If
someone read that post and was unaware of specific products there was
nothing in there that would have pointed them to it.
If anything, the flames seem to be a good example of the "no good deed goes
unpunished" rule. Glenn, the tireless listadmin to whom we owe thanks for
this list, wrote an email to me a few weeks ago suggesting my posts would be
stronger if I left out specific product brand names. Although I don't
entirely agree in all cases (since at times when one provides a proof by
counter-example it is essential not to be mealy-mouthed and generic if a
specific, concrete example provides the proof), I could see the wisdom of
his advice and so resolved to reserve the use of specific product names for
cases when they were specifically on point.
I think Glenn's advice was pretty good in the current case. To the extent
that there is a class of new, modern GIS packages that do GIS as well as or
better than the legacy packages at one tenth or one twentieth the cost my
case grows stronger by not naming names. While it is rather flattering that
the flamers seem to think that only one package fits the bill of being a
modern GIS package that does more than the legacy stuff at one twentieth the
price, there are in fact other packages that support the trend of using
modern software to provide better value, better performance and higher
quality at Microsoft Office levels of pricing instead of SAP levels of
pricing. I didn't think it necessary to name names, but I guess the flamers
haven't had time to keep up with modern trends in GIS so it would have been
useful to provide some specific examples.
> You can support
> the use of high quality, high performance and high value software by
> providing links to freeware packages for various formats and to
> those modern
> packages that provide good value, perhaps by providing special emphasis on
> packages that cost less than $300 a seat.
If we consider the words in the original post (flamers don't do that, but
what the heck, let's pretend that they do...) we can see that freeware
packages are cited and the presence of other packages (note the use of the
plural) is implied. Off the top of my head I can think of many freeware GIS
packages, as can anyone with real GIS experience. MicroDEM, for example, is
a really superb package. Although not to my taste, GRASS has many adherents
and it too is free. Many speciality packages from bad to good, are also
available free.
In the commercial world, in addition to the most powerful GIS ever written
(which is sufficiently famous that it need not be named) there are many
examples of commercial packages that fit the above description. Lots of
people use Maptitude from Caliper for general purpose GIS and various Blue
Marble products for format conversions. Although in both cases these
products are over the $300 mark, nonetheless they bo
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
