8 · 05

Mashup Shows that Gulf Oil Spill is Bigger than the Portland Metro Area!

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico appears to be much bigger than the greater Portland Metro Area and in fact looks like it could fill the whole Willamette Valley.  Paul Rademacher created this Google Earth Mashup that lets you view the oil spill in the gulf and then superimpose it over places you might know.  This is a smart way to give people a personal context for the spill and improve their understanding.

12 · 02

What Buzz Needs to Win Me Over - For Starters

I want to like Google Buzz because it has some very interesting features. Google has created a service that screams potential once the rough edges have been tweaked.  Until they refine it, I'm pretty much staying away from any real investment because my experience has been... well... frustrating (produced a few curses).   Many have noted the issues with privacy that stem from the way Google launched Buzz.  In addition to those issues I have been struggling with some things I would need to see fixed before I can take the service seriously.

  1. Buzz has a messed up way of prioritizing posts that leads to the same few people showing up at the top of the stream.   In fact it's the only social tool that basically shows me the same exact information every time I log in.  I can see what Google is trying to do here by putting the hot conversations and posts at the front of the line. Don't get me wrong, I like the posts of James Scoble, Pete Cashmore, and Marshall Kirkpatrick.   For me it's a failure because I want to see whats happening right now! Not the hottest thing that happened two or three days ago.  I also want to see what my less godlike friends are saying!   Yes, I know there is a mute function, however, it doesn't seem to persist between logins.

  2. The process for figuring out who is following me is total fail in the mobile app.  Buzz notifies me of people that are follow me in a digest style post that is very useful.  I like to be selective in who I follow back and want to base my choices on good information.  If I click on a persons details in the mobile buzz app I'm told that I should add more information about a follower in my address book? This experience is totally fail.  I want to see their Google profile or some sort of abstract.  With twitter I can see a persons bio in almost any mobile app, I don't have to create it for them through research.

  3. The process of figuring out who's following me from buzz within gmail is too much work.  You can call me lazy, however, I have sever allergic reactions to having to click though screens that don't seem necessary.    From the time you get the digest post to the time you arrive at the persons bio in their Google profile you have to click on three different links.   As with the mobile app, can't we see their Google profile bio with one click?

  4. It might be me. but Google Reader integration is pretty confusing when it comes to following or unfollowing additions from Buzz.  This is my most nit-picky complaint. If you don't care about google reader you can just skip this one.  It seemed like buzz just automatically added people to my google reader source list at first.  I cannot remember adding them through some option. This caused the list to go from about 20 people to 176.  I get about an extra 300 items every few hours from this increase.  I'm cool with sorting through it and purging some folks (no offense to them).  My first attempt at doing this resulted in me unfollowing them from Google Buzz all together!  At worst the process is broken and needs fixing, at best it's very confusing and needs some tweaks.


Like I said in the beginning - Buzz has some great potential once Google irons these issues out.  Until then you can find me mostly in Twitter.  Oh, and just to hedge all of my bets, here is my profile if you want to follow me on Google buzz: http://www.google.com/profiles/justin.c.houk

If you think I'm wrong in this post about anything,  you agree, or you just want to say hello please leave me a comment.

 

Related Links

 

Google and Social: Like Nerds at the Dance – GigaOM http://bit.ly/aKKRCd

Dear Google Buzz: 4 Features You Need to Add Now http://bit.ly/d4u8at

Google Buzz and the Five Principles of Designing For Meaning - Umair Haque - Harvard Business Review http://bit.ly/cFxh9M

Stowe Boyd - /message - Google's Anti-Buzz: Too Much Publicy? http://bit.ly/acChkd

Google Listens to Critics and Tweaks Buzz – GigaOM http://bit.ly/cX6X3O

9 · 02

Google Buzz Could Push other Services Into Open Standards

This morning I wrote a short post on the way that tools like tweetdeck bring parts of Social web together. I lamented how Googles new update service would add yet another protocol to work with.  Well according to Marshall Kirkpatrick of ReadWriteWeb, Google's new Buzz service could change the entire social updates game because it's relying on open data standards.  This could push Twitter, Facebook and others to open their own services.  Read more on Marshall K.'s post here.

24 · 11

Seth Godin: Rupert Murdoch has it backwards

Rupert Murdoch has it backwards

You don't charge the search engines to send people to articles on your site, you pay them.

If you can't make money from attention, you should do something else for a living. Charging money for attention gets you neither money nor attention.

Simple, direct, and stinging assesment by Seth Godin of Rupert Murdoch's recient assertion that he will block prominant search services from scanning the Wall Street Journal and other sites.

Related Links:

Analyst: News Corp.'s Google saber rattling really about MySpace

The Definition of Evil: Microsofts Search Wars Hurt Us All

The Money is in Redistribution

Dear Rupert: You Don't Succeed By Making Life More Difficult For Users

Twitter Founder to Murdoch: Blocking Google Will Fail FAst

Microsoft and News Corp in Discussions to Remove Newspaper Content From Google

27 · 10

How GIS Lost the Web - Comments on 'Spatial Isn’t Special' by James Fee

James Fee's Original Post from the WeoGeo Blog

I was reading Paul’s blog post last week wondering if he had been putting the Jedi Mind Trick on me the last couple years.  I’d like to think that my mind is stronger than that and began to reflect on why I was drawn to WeoGeo after working as a consultant all these years.  In the first 10+ years of being a GIS consultant, things were really steady.  Our clients didn’t change much (mostly DoD), our billing rates increased over the years as these clients saw value in our implementing professional GIS systems and we never felt like we had too much or too little work.  Pure bliss…

Life before Google was easy for GIS professionals

Then came that fateful day in 2004 when Google bought Keyhole.  Most of us GIS folks knew who Keyhole was.  We’d seen their demo at tradeshows and conferences and thought, “If I only had money I’d so implement that”.  But along came Google, who unlike the rest of us has money.  They bought Keyhole and soon Google Earth was a household name.  In fact, now when we were sitting next to someone on the airplane, we could now utter the phrase, “Like Google Earth” when describing what we do.

But that wasn’t all, we had one more surprise.  Google had bought a company out of Australia in 2004, but not too many of us knew about it or cared.  That small company was brought on to revolutionize how spatial data was shared (yes even more than Google Earth).  Google Maps was everything us GIS pros wanted in our GIS web apps.  Unlike our slow ArcIMS or WMS based solutions, this tool was slippy.  Users weren’t interrupted as the page had to load and unlike what we were doing (and are still doing) it was intuitive.  We all knew right now our existing web maps were broken and we’d have to change.

And change it did, I recall getting calls from so many more companies and organizations than before.  They all wanted the same thing, their data on Google Maps.  Of course these projects were all that simple, but the end result was the old points on a map routine (with some Google Chart API if you were lucky).  It wasn’t so much that they didn’t get geospatial; it was that they didn’t view it as special.  And wasn’t this what we’ve been fighting for all these years?  Don’t lock the GIS crew in a back room; bring them up in the front so everyone can benefit from GIS.  Except one thing, most consultants were built around delivering custom GIS solutions to clients who paid good money for it.  These new GIS users didn’t want custom and they didn’t want to pay much.

On top of all it, big A&E firms started to squeeze out the small boutique consulting shops who used to provide much of the GIS support to government clients.  Without these contracts, these firms had to look for work where they could find it, providing pushpins on maps showing tabular information.  You went from average billing rate of over $100 to just over $50 ($75 if you were lucky).  You still could find work at the higher rates, but that was usually far in between.  To make up for the lower revenue, consultants started taking on more jobs.  Working twice as hard for the same revenue as before, but happy to be working with JavaScript APIs rather than VB6 and Java.

So what happened?  Wasn’t the “spatial isn’t special” supposed to free us all and make us more money?  Now of course there are some of us still making a good living doing what we are doing, but when something becomes a commodity our standard of living (coding?) decreases.  That isn’t to say that we should be wishing for the days integrating MapObjects onto FoxPro.  No clearly that wasn’t as fun as you remembered.  What GIS consultants did in the past to justify such higher billing rates is to bring something else to the table, something of value that you couldn’t get anywhere else.  Converting shapefiles to KML or geocoding addresses from Microsoft Excel onto Google Maps isn’t special, nor are most of the other “GIS” applications being developed today.  This means those consultants who either don’t have existing contracts or can’t provide value added services are left to the mercy of the market that doesn’t put much value on spatial analysis.  And if you aren’t special, your revenue will be squeezed and you’ll be working very hard with little reward.  Don Meltz sums it up very well when he describes GIS Analysts like word processors of the 70s and 80s.  When everyone is using spatial technology, how can you be special?

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 27th, 2009 at 8:30 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

 

The GEOpdx Take

First and foremost, desktop GIS isn't as dead as most would have us believe. Lets save that for a future discussion.

James Fee's post is spot on about spatially enabling the web. This is what we have been striving for in the Geospatial business. I can remember going to my first ESRI conference (probably 1998) and hearing about how MapOjects IMS would revolutionize mapping on the web.

The problem was that MapObjects IMS was short on value and high on price. A basic single server license cost 11k a year and the apps were very difficult to scale. So the dream of spatially enabling the web was dead instantly because not many outside of government could justify those costs. Here is a case of a business model throttling the stated goal in the long run.

Fast forward to today. The original geospatial movers have made distinctive efforts to update in the face of companies like Google/Microsoft and open source platforms like OSM. These competitors have basically created business models that provide a better value to cost relationship with customers for mass market apps. The problem is that the goal is no longer within reach because GIS vendors never created the capitol to get there. They are now relegated to the same market they started with.

The question is: does this situation signal a continuing trajectory? ESRI now offers ArcGIS server - a platform that nobody can afford outside of governments and large companies (again). It is decidedly more capable as a toolbox than MapObjects IMS ever was. Will a somewhat better cost to value ratio be enough to change things or will the business model continue to strangle the offering? Please feel free to make your thoughts known in the comments.


UPDATE: Related Links

Sean Gorman: The Once and Future Map, The Destiny of GIS

GIS Lounge: To What End, GIS?

Bixel is Outside: Advice for the GIS Newbie

Geofoolery: The future Ain't What It Used to Be

Geobabbler: What is this "GIS" of witch you Speak?

Don Meltz: GIS is Dead - Long Live GIS

Justin Houk

I'm just this guy on the interwebs! Keeping it real. I'm interested in leveraging old and new internet technology to connect and forge high value relationships, change government, and help people find a voice (not voices in their heads). I'm a Geospatial Geek in the Portland area. I speak my own opinions and I'm working on leaving the porch light on for visitors. I'm a firm believer in doing as much good as I can before inevitably turning to the dark side.

Creative Commons License

About

Justin Houk's Curated info stream on government 2.0, citizen 2.0, and community. Geolocation and Shiney things too!