Proceed to GeoCommunity Home Page


SpatialNewsGIS Data DepotGeoImaging ChannelGIS and MappingSoftwareGIS JobsGeoBids-RFPsGeoCommunity MarketplaceGIS Event Listings
HomeLoginAccountsAboutContactAdvertiseSearchFAQsForumsCartFree Newsletter

Sponsored by:


TOPICS
Today's News

Submit News

Feature Articles

Product Reviews

Education

News Affiliates

Discussions

Newsletters

Email Lists

Polls

Editor's Corner


SpatialNews Daily Newswire!
Subscribe now!

Latest Industry Headlines
SiteVision GIS Partnership With City of Roanoke VA Goes Live
Garmin® Introduces Delta™ Upland Remote Trainer with Beeper
Caliper Offers Updated Chile Data for Use with Maptitude 2013
Southampton’s Go! Rhinos Trail Mapped by Ordnance Survey
New Approach to Measuring Coral Growth Offers Valuable Tool for Reef Managers
Topo ly - Tailor-Fit for Companies' Online Mapping Needs

Latest GeoBids-RFPs
Nautical Charts*Poland
Software & Telemetry GPS
Spatial Data Management-DC
Geospatial and Mapping-DC
Next-Gen 911-MO

Recent Job Opportunities
Planner/GIS Specialist
Team Leader- Grape Supply Systems
Geospatial Developer

Recent Discussions
Raster images
cartographic symbology
Telephone Exchange areas in Europe
Problem showcasing Vector map on Windows CE device
Base map

GeoCommunity Mailing List
 
Mailing List Archives

Subject: RE: GISList: Interior e-gov tack irks GIS vendors - want a NEW D EAL?
Date:  04/27/2003 07:15:01 PM
From:  Neil Havermale



When you can not compete with new ideas or better implementations due to
in-situ bias and de-facto standards, its always better to directly ask for a
NEW DEAL.

In summary, I will suggest the following....

Index words: bloated, inefficient, legacy, overpriced, bureaucratic, leaden,
unpopularity, versus, effective, low cost, wonderful, and piling on.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dimitri Rotow [mailto:dar@manifold.net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 6:31 AM
To: gislist@geocomm.com
Subject: RE: GISList: Interior e-gov tack irks GIS vendors (Geospatial
One-Stop initiative)



>
> > Isn't history and inertia against such efforts, however well
> > intended ?
>
> Sure it is. Standards take incredibly much longer to establish than
> anyone would consider reasonable from a technical point of view. There
> is such

I'd disagree. Standards that are effective and make sense take off like
wildfire - look at the use of mp3's to swap music, for example. On the
other hand, I would agree with you that bloated, inefficient standards that
make life difficult for users and serve only to protect the commercial
interests of legacy vendors do take incredibly much longer to establish. The
music recording industry's attempt to establish "standards" that prevent
users from copying music is one such notorious example, and OGC is shaping
up as yet another such notorious example.

The reason OGC standards are going nowhere is that most GIS users want fast,
modern, effective GIS at very low cost (GIS users understandably want to be
a part of the wonderful price/performance revolution that has swept almost
all other areas of computer hardware and software) and using OGC is the
opposite of that - it's a formula for slow, overpriced, inefficient,
bureaucratic products that don't make sense for most users. That a few
organizations with a penchant for organizational bloat and Severe Budget
Wastage Syndrome ("SBWS"... pronounced "s-bws") are fond of going to
meetings at which "standards" that no one uses are invented is not the
wildfire effect that rapidly wins the hearts and minds of users.


> just valuable, but so common sense that you simply don't realize them
> any longer. Screws, disks, PCs, protocols, data exchange formats...

Setting aside those examples not relevant to how high tech standards emerge
(screws), let's not re-write history: for the most part those standards that
populate our tech world were rapidly adapted, at times quite literally
overnight, because they made sense and were very convenient at the time for
achieving maximum price/performance. Centronics parallel ports, for
example, were universally adopted by the printer industry within a few
months, as were the various standards surrounding the Wintel clone
architecture.

[I apologize for piling on against OGC, but this lame excuse of "standards
are so hard to establish" in lieu of touching base with the reality of OGC's
leaden unpopularity irked me into penning this missive...]

Regards to all,

Dimitri



To unsubscribe, write to gislist-unsubscribe@geocomm.com
________________________________________________________________________
GeoCommunity GeoBids - less than $1 per day!
Get Access to the latest GIS & Geospatial Industry RFPs and bids
http://www.geobids.com

Online Archive of GISList (and numerous others) available at:
http://spatialnews.geocomm.com/community/lists/

Setup a GeoCommunity Account and have access to
the GISDataDepot DRG & DOQQ Catalog http://www.geocomm.com/login.php


To unsubscribe, write to gislist-unsubscribe@geocomm.com
________________________________________________________________________
GeoCommunity GeoBids - less than $1 per day!
Get Access to the latest GIS & Geospatial Industry RFPs and bids
http://www.geobids.com

Online Archive of GISList (and numerous others) available at:
http://spatialnews.geocomm.com/community/lists/

Setup a GeoCommunity Account and have access to
the GISDataDepot DRG & DOQQ Catalog
http://www.geocomm.com/login.php


Sponsored by:

For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!

Copyright© 1995-2012 MindSites Group / Privacy Policy

GeoCommunity™, Wireless Developer Network™, GIS Data Depot®, and Spatial News™
including all logos and other service marks
are registered trademarks and trade communities of
MindSites Group