From rhoskins@home.com Thu Apr 15 18:01:44 1999 Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW99.02/8.9.3+UW99.01) with ESMTP id SAA41276 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:01:44 -0700 Received: from ha1.rdc1.wa.home.com (siteadm@ha1.rdc1.wa.home.com [24.0.2.66]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW99.02/8.9.3+UW99.01) with ESMTP id SAA00828 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:01:43 -0700 Received: from c501552a ([24.5.121.123]) by ha1.rdc1.wa.home.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAA10686; Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:01:41 -0700 Message-ID: <003e01be87a4$aef17a80$7b790518@olmpi1.wa.home.com> From: "Richard E. Hoskins" To: Cc: Subject: WAPHGIS: ArcView problems Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:01:38 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003B_01BE876A.024F7F00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01BE876A.024F7F00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you are a member of a product listserve, whatever it is, I have found = that eventually the participants get all fired up on what is wrong with = their software. I am a member of all of them and it seems they all = love/hate their software. Of course if you want to get the full brunt of = the discussion you should join the listserve of the software you have - = or better - before you buy one, join and see if you can pick up a thread = of which package will serve you needs best and not drive you to = distraction.=20 Someone who was monitoring a discussion about MapInfo problems related = his opinion as follows (with permission) is below. My reason for passing this along is to encourage GIS users to really = think (for themselves) and evaluate what in the world you really = want/why and what tradeoffs etc you are willing to deal with respect to = you budget.=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Thomas G=FClden=20 To: MapInfo-L (E-Mail)=20 Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 1999 2:07 PM Subject: AW: MI MapInfo Annoyances Revisited Dear annoyed MI users, =20 It is true that MapInfo has many annoyances. However, after having = worked with MapInfo for some time I have to deal with ArcView now, = because my employer (governmental in Germany) has chosen it as his = desktop solution. =20 Now, in comparison, I really find the ArcView UI completely = uncomfortable, since it avoids consequently to adhere to windows = standards. Menus and terminology are kind of build to hide the true = purposes. When AV 3.1 was launched we ordered the German version, the = English came, the German supplement is still awaited. =20 If you look at the map projections provided, there is only a fraction of = the huge amount that come with MI. And interestingly (if not annoyingly) = a German national grid projection (Gauss Kruger) was not included, so = you would have to do it through a custom projection until the German = supplement is delivered (I believe). And the custom projection dialog is = really awkward. Then you can color objects only by layer, and as of my = knowledge can only reproject long/lat maps on the fly. Is there any = raster registration tool in AV ???? =20 You see, each Desktop GIS has its major flaws, but I view MI certainly = as the better balanced and more user friendly alternative. =20 AV has its strength in map layouts, linking tables, and project = management. But to my feeling the aforementioned missings are more = fundamental. On the other hand each comparison is subjective. =20 If we discuss wish lists: I would like to have spreadsheet like behaviour of the browser, which = should be more formattable, better performance and more WYSIWYG in = layouts, the ability to have a layout as a self contained document, = better intelligent labelling, data-aware dialog designer, more = comfortable linking of tables, dynamic coordinate grids and scalebars, = better transparent raster performance. =20 My feeling is that MapInfo has added recently more features which are = better suited to add-ons, like the gridding capability. Although I = haven't used the built-in gridding much yet, my feeling is that if you = want to do serious gridding, you are better off with buying Vertical = Mapper anyway. So, instead of adding more add-on-prone features, I would = rather see the so much wanted enhancements of the basics. =20 It seems that the 5.5 Beta addresses at least some of the issues, but by = far not all of them (to address all of them at once, would be a stupid = marketing, right ?) However, MI has certainly listened: you can now add = legends based on non-thematic layers, queries can be saved, and the = stupid report tool of version 4.5 has been replaced by a Crystal Reports = add-on. It seems that the pace of change is just a little slow from = upgrade to upgrade. =20 Will the Y2K release of MapInfo be called MapInfo 2000 ? (I hope not.) =20 Regards Thomas G=FClden=20 Diplom-Geologe=20 Email (privat): thomasgulden@csi.com=20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01BE876A.024F7F00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If you are a member of a product = listserve,=20 whatever it is, I have found that eventually the participants get all = fired up=20 on what is wrong with their software. I am a member of all of them and = it seems=20 they all love/hate their software. Of course if you want to get the full = brunt=20 of the discussion you should join the listserve of the software you have = - or=20 better - before you buy one, join and see if you can pick up a thread of = which=20 package will serve you needs best and not drive you to distraction.=20
 
Someone who was monitoring a discussion = about=20 MapInfo problems related his opinion as follows (with permission) is=20 below.
 
My reason for passing this along is to = encourage=20 GIS users to really think (for themselves) and evaluate what in the = world you=20 really want/why and what tradeoffs etc you are willing to deal with = respect to=20 you budget.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas = G=FClden=20
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 1999 = 2:07=20 PM
Subject: AW: MI MapInfo = Annoyances=20 Revisited

Dear=20 annoyed MI users,
 
It is=20 true that MapInfo has many annoyances. However, after having worked with = MapInfo=20 for some time I have to deal with ArcView now, because my employer = (governmental=20 in Germany) has chosen it as his desktop solution.
 
Now,=20 in comparison, I really find the ArcView UI completely uncomfortable, = since it=20 avoids consequently to adhere to windows standards. Menus and = terminology are=20 kind of build to hide the true purposes. When AV 3.1 was launched = we=20 ordered the German version, the English came, the German supplement is = still=20 awaited.
 
If you=20 look at the map projections provided, there is only a fraction of the = huge=20 amount that come with MI. And interestingly (if not annoyingly) a German = national grid projection (Gauss Kruger) was not included, so you would = have to=20 do it through a custom projection until the German supplement is = delivered (I=20 believe). And the custom projection dialog is really awkward. Then you = can color=20 objects only by layer, and as of my knowledge can only reproject = long/lat maps=20 on the fly. Is there any raster registration tool in AV = ????
 
You=20 see, each Desktop GIS has its major flaws, but I view MI certainly as = the better=20 balanced and more user friendly alternative.
 
AV has=20 its strength in map layouts, linking tables, and project management. But = to my=20 feeling the aforementioned missings are more fundamental. On the other = hand each=20 comparison is subjective.
 
If we=20 discuss wish lists:
I=20 would like to have spreadsheet like behaviour of the browser, which = should be=20 more formattable, better performance and more WYSIWYG in layouts, the = ability to=20 have a layout as a self contained document, better intelligent = labelling,=20 data-aware dialog designer, more comfortable linking of tables, dynamic=20 coordinate grids and scalebars, better transparent raster=20 performance.
 
My=20 feeling is that MapInfo has added recently more features which are = better suited=20 to add-ons, like the gridding capability. Although I haven't used the = built-in=20 gridding much yet, my feeling is that if you want to do serious = gridding, you=20 are better off with buying Vertical Mapper anyway. So, instead of adding = more=20 add-on-prone features, I would rather see the so much wanted = enhancements of the=20 basics.
 
It=20 seems that the 5.5 Beta addresses at least some of the issues, but by = far not=20 all of them (to address all of them at once, would be a stupid = marketing, right=20 ?) However, MI has certainly listened: you can now add legends based on=20 non-thematic layers, queries can be saved, and the stupid report tool of = version=20 4.5 has been replaced by a Crystal Reports add-on. It seems that the = pace of=20 change is just a little slow from upgrade to = upgrade.
 
Will=20 the Y2K release of MapInfo be called MapInfo 2000 ? (I hope=20 not.)
 
Regards
 

Thomas=20 G=FClden
Diplom-Geologe

Email (privat):     =20 thomasgulden@csi.com 
 

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01BE876A.024F7F00-- .