Slashdot Mirror
3D Computer Network Maps
beebware writes: "According to this article on C|Net, Tim Bray (co-inventor of XML) has launched Antarcti.ca which renders computer networks in 2 and 3D maps. It's currently running a demo off the ODP data. But will it take off? Will users really like 'country-maps' opposed to listings? (Incidentally Tim used to be vice-president of production at Yahoo! so I think we can tell what his money's on.)"
I agree. I looked briefly at the 2D map ('net mapped onto Antartica), and it's not logical. Here are the problems I see:
- Arbitrary mapping of categories to unrelated geographical space. e.g. "Computers" => "Northwest corner of Antarctica". This fails to take advantage of everything users already know in terms of information categorization, alphabetical listing, etc. It also forces users to memorize the random placement of categories, rather than having the computer do that (by logical organization).
- Difficult to read interface. Having bullseye targets, text hyperlinks, a variety of region colors, black region boundaries, and a white grid all makes for a confusing and difficult-to-read interface. It was just too busy. It was necessary to intently study the sub-maps to try and find something, in contrast to Yahoo where I can quickly scan a simple text list and quickly find what I want.
I'm hesitant to dismiss others' technological visions, since I'm usually wrong, but this interface concept seems doomed from the start. It throws out almost everything known about user-interfaces. It also forces users to mentally organize and memorize a random list instead of having the computer do that and then give users a sensible list.
I hope they prove me wrong, but with Google's great searching and Yahoo!'s convenient categories, why would I want to memorize an arbitrary "Antarctization" of the internet?
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
Have you not seen Jurassic Park? Apparently you didn't get the oh-so subtle reference.
Grab a clue before you post crap like this.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Since you all are obviously reading these responses, I do have a question for you:
Why?
I'm not trying to be a jerk either. But I have to wonder, with the likes of Yahoo!, Google, et al, why is this better?
Granted, the idea of web indexes is important. The idea of 2D/3D maps of what are essentially semantic networks is somewhat cool too. (Tony Buzan's "mind" (idea) maps come to mind.) But were those two combined aspects enough to justify the (probably substantial) expenditures that were put into this?
What are you hoping to achieve?
Please think about your answer. I have already seen the "Why map.net?" clip on your site (Answer: "Because it's fun").
You'll notice the rather anemic levels of slashdot postings on this story. I think this item has bewildered more people than just me, so your answer may help spark our imaginations.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
This just shows me how much more valuable a directory-like listing is than these graphical representations of the internet (or any network, for that matter). I've seen a few of these graphical representations, and I admit they are cool ideas, none of them seem practical at any level.
"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." - Jack Nicholson
The site uses the Open Directory Product Data but it does some fairly funky stuff with it. The graphs seem to be a pretty nice way of displaying the data. You can easily tell sizes of categories and how they relate to one another.
They seem to use some sort of data other than the ODP data. The size of the circles seems to indicate the popularity of the site. I don't know where they are getting this data. Maybe they are doing something like google and seeing how many links to the site there are. That information certainly isn't in the ODP data.
They are not using live ODP data and they seem to have stripped the site descriptions off. Also the pages seem to take about a minute to download and draw (I think its the drawing, not the slashdotting).
Maybe if they can solve some of those problems I would consider using it as a nifty way to browse the ODP....
I *KNOW* THIS!
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
"The new wave is not value-added; it's garbage-subtracted" - Esther Dyson, Dec 1994
i think the "Regional" area and the "Adult" areas got their labels backwards... if the internet was mapped out with proper ratios, i think there would be enough porn on the net to take up about 90% of the map... hee hee.
Shameless Self Promotion : Webhosting at Blender Networks.
I have to agree with a lot of the reviews here. The map itself is not very exciting and it doesn't seem to add much value to the organization of information. In addition, it has a drawback in that it takes a lot longer to navigate through when compared to text only indexes. Plus everything was fairly cluttered and when I drilled down it came to a point where there was a labeled region and I couldn't figure out how to get into that region (it was alternative radio), although I could select the links in that region on the higher level.
One new interface that I have been impressed with is WebBrain. It's fast, exciting, and organizes and crossreferences information very well. I wish I had a project where this would make sense to use :)
-no broken link
Mappa Mundi, a good webzine that often discussed these types of visualization issues before it ceased production, ran an article on Tim Bray's Hyperlink Totems, referring to an early mapping-the-web project of his.
That was 1995. He's been doing this a while!
----
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
In addition to being limited to Internet Explorer users, this site lets you pull up a 3-D visualization using a plug-in. Unfortunately, it's a 2.3Mb download, and after the wizard installs it, you're required to reboot. I clicked the "close" box on that dialog with ... unpleasant ... consequences.
Just so you know what you're getting into.
----
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
I think thinkgeek already has a mock up map available in poster format of the entire internet. Probably not as accurate though.
I am !amused.
Sorry, the URL's been manged - try http://www.antarcti.ca/ . Also I've heard back from 'my man inside' and it seems the 3D function only tends to work on IE5 due to XML implementation. They have considered using other 'display technologies' (such as SGML) but aren't sure which ones to go with.
Richy C.
--
Check out Purdue ECN Network Maps
Is it just me, or is that a bad link to the site?
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
It's typed right but the URL is wrong, it's:
Antarti.ca as in http://antarcti.ca.
--
All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
Antarcti.ca This should fix it :o)
Don't know about anyone else, but to me the ordering of information based on some sort of mapped goegraphic reference seems really mad. Its by no means logical to have to search through something based on where it is in 2, or 3, dimensions. If the challenge was to make an accurate representation of the computer network then they have failed. Theres no way that they could get any sort of vector information from the ODP so directions on the map would be meaningless. If they have tried to make an interface that is easier to use than the ODP directory system then they have once again failed. I couldn't find a link on their maps in ages, in the directory it took me about 20 seconds. If, however, they wanted to make an entertaining and technically accomplished distraction thats kinda fun, then I congratulate them.
Maybe I'm too used to my simple 2D windowed interface, but I like it. Its easy. I don't think I need another dimension. Perhaps they'll prove me wrong.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Sorry!
The Antarcti.ca? client software currently only works with Internet Explorer version 5.0 or higher, because it requires 2-D vector graphics. We will add Netscape and Mozilla support as soon as the World Wide Web Consortium completes the standardization process for SVG.
Bleh.
Trying to get map.net to come up, I stumbled across this directory. (Nice when you don't set up your server to provide a default page...) Anyway, the two pages that I found most interesting are the help pages for 2D Navigation and 3D Navigation. Not really the same as being able to interact with the map, but I think it gives the general impression of what it is all about. I especially like the discussion regarding sizes and colors of buildings (near the bottom of the 3D page) -- fairly intuitive, though I would try to keep the colors more consistent between building types.
"I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum. I'm all out of bubblegum." MSE USC APX AIA CSI CASp
Note that a lot of the graphs seem to be drawn with SVG, so you'll need an SVG-capable browser (other comments suggest IE5 should work, Mozilla with SVG compiled in (i.e. not a nightly or milestone build) should too), or an SVG plugin (Mozilla prompted me to download an SVG plugin, that's how I know).
:)
If anyone knows of a suitable SVG plugin (for Linux x86) so I can keep using my Mozilla nightlies, I'd appreciate it.
A good visualization allows a good set of data to more readily be converted into the knowledge the user is seeking by analyzing the data. It adds information to the data through the visual arrangement, allowing humans - who are better at visual pattern recognition than numerical or textual pattern recognition - to quickly mine out the information they need.
t s.asp?from=bookinfo&Au=Tufte%2C+Edward+R%2 E&Ti=&Su=&Pu=&RegAction=t&SearchFunction=reg&qorde r=title
Wile the Antarcti.ca idea is cool, and the design is visually attractive (at least, to me), I find that the presentation of the information could use some additional work. The sites that are listed are plotted as points on a map of "Antarctica" representing the Net - but the distance between points and their relative positioning does not seem to carry any particular meaning (at least, the sites I linked to from this site did not seem to have easily discernable traits which would make the distances meaningful)
The site is certainly attractive, but I think the integration of a system of text similarity measurement and positioning of the sites based on these metrics would greatly enhance the utility of the site (or, if this is already being done, it is not being done very well and needs improvement)
Also, the site will not be able to grow very large without a better notion of clustering based on some actually meaningful site comparison metrics (text similarity, google-like popularity measurements, etc.), since in order to have millions of sites on the map the idea they have implemented of moving around the map will need to be combined with some notion of places on the map having greater semantic meaning and also to reduce clutter, a more dynamic system of display which allows for better "zoom in / out" type functionality to "drill-down" into areas of interest based on representative, canonical sites that would appear on the high-level map.
All the beginnings are there, and it is a good start, I hope this goes somewhere...
By the way...
Anyone who thinks this field is cool, check out (if you haven't already) the books by Edward Tufte (I've put a reference at the bottom). And if you think you'd like to make some competing visualizations, check out this really great start-up data relationship viz tool company which my company is considering partnering with: www.thinkmap.com
----------------
Tufte's Books:
http://www1.fatbrain.com/asp/Search/SearchResul
o/~ we are pissed, we are pissed, we have to resist... o/~ - ec8or
One thing I'd like to see is the Internet represented as a multi-dimensional map where each axis represents a relevance to a particular subject i.e. technology, media, porn or whatever. Of course the rating and choice of axis would be somewhat arbitrary, but it would make for an interesting reference and perhaps allow for novel forms of searching based on a set of criteria e.g technology > 0.8 AND media > 0.1
Of course, who'd do all of this rating is another question...
Jon Erikson, IT guru