Slashdot Mirror


Google Maps Now Cover Whole World

GregBryant writes "They haven't blogged it yet, but maps.google.com has added some additional scaling-out, and maps of the entire world are available. Only country names so far (except in the US, Canada & UK) but it's still nice to finally click back & forth between the Satellite imagery and some real maps, even if their proportions don't quite match."

52 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. Professionally, I Love This by geomon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Getting satellite views of physiographic features from a readily available source is truly one of the best things to come from the internet. The only downside to the Google satellite images is that the highest resolution images cover metropolitian areas. This is great for folks who use it for urban planning, environmental impact assessments, historic studies, etc., it doesn't do much for geologists or geographers. Still, it is free.....

    As a geologist it is nice to have aerial tools on line, especially when some of the other taxpayer funded sources of data have been taken offline by private companies. While I don't object to paying for data produced by private companies, I get a bit steamed with the idea that I have to pay *twice* for government-generated data. I understand the necessity to save the taxpayers money, but in the case of topographic, DEM, and DLG sources generated by the government, we have already paid for most of the cost of production; hosting is a fraction of cost for agencies such as the USGS.

    Even if hosting were a significant cost, paid advertising could cover the cost and provide a good income for any company interested in providing the service for the government. The fees that some of these charge for taxpayer-subsidized data is rediculous.

    Thanks again to Google.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    1. Re:Professionally, I Love This by Momoru · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It also appears that for North America (maybe about as far south as Costa Rica) you can zoom in down to the 4th to last zoom level...it gets kind of pixelly, but from a geographer point of view, its neat to be able to pick out distinct urban and country areas in remote places like southern Mexico and Guatamala

  2. Well by Neophus · · Score: 2, Funny

    I still can't find area 51! dang.

    --
    Why do i have to be so lazy? :(
    1. Re:Well by G-Licious! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm going to cut their balls off for this:
      http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.179343,5.097656& spn=51.280426,113.818359&hl=en

      (Take a look at the Netherlands.)

  3. Weird.. by pigeon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If I zoom in to a certain magnification, the labels of Belgium and the Netherlands are switched.. if I zoom further in, it's correct.. I do wonder what plans google has with their expansion to europe..

  4. So.... by Himring · · Score: 4, Funny

    You could always do this in Civ as soon as you build Apollo world wonder....

    --
    "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
  5. Well.. by PopeAlien · · Score: 4, Funny

    Getting all the country names and rough maps is a good first step for WORLD DOMINATION!

    1. Re:Well.. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Funny

      Getting all the country names and rough maps is a good first step for WORLD DOMINATION!

      Hey I can see your house! It's all bright and shiny, like if it was covered in, I don't know, tin-foil or something. Most puzzling...

      Anyway, I'm so glad you pointed that out. After all, before google, we NEVER had detailed maps of the Earth with country names. I even thought the planet was flat...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:Well.. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 2, Funny

      The planet is flat you stupid heathen!

      Can't you see from your own eyes? Even that ungodly google shows it's flat!


      Yes. Humour.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
  6. I wish by interiot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Japan isn't there yet, apparently... Here's tokyo... zooming in one more level on sattellite-view or two more levels on map-view results in blank data. ("we're sorry, but we don't have imagery at this zoom level for this region"). I think this has always been true of japan on google maps. So... has anything really changed?

  7. I agree. by game+kid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On a side note, am I the only one who notices that dragging the zoom bar's handle has a smooth (fatbits or whatever one calls it) zooming effect* now?

    Firefox users need not apply; I see it on IE only so far, so I'm guessing it uses script and their zoom "Microsoft extension to Cascading Style Sheets (CSS)." (rough translation: it's a non-standardized property)

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    1. Re:I agree. by periol · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're guessing? Without having any clue what "plain doesn't work" means (thanks for the technical language), and not working for Google, I have to wonder if you've turned Javascript off in your options. Or one of your extensions has.

  8. weeeelll, not everywhere... by geeklawyer · · Score: 2, Informative

    "We could not understand the location amsterdam, netherlands"

    --
    -he who laughs last, is a bit slow.
    journal
  9. Professionally? by khrtt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you are a geologist urban planner, or historian, why can't you buy satellite imagery? You'd get well-specified data, and not just some pictures from an unknown source. The cost of the data should be inconsequential if you have any kind of a budget. Having to pay twice for data from tax-funded sources is outrageous, but it doesn't make your life harder.

    What I'm trying to say, professionals might have a use for this, but it shouldn't benefit them that much. On the other hand, if you are about to go hiking or hunting, or skiing, or fishing, then this is your only chance to see the area where you are going before you get there. It's also a great addition to driving directions. Would be even better if the imagery was real-time, or near real-time.

    1. Re:Professionally? by geomon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you are a geologist urban planner, or historian, why can't you buy satellite imagery?

      I do. Re-read the original post.

      The cost of the data should be inconsequential if you have any kind of a budget.

      One of my customers is the federal government.

      I think many of the folks who post here object to the notion that I should think of my budget as "inconsequential".

      Having to pay twice for data from tax-funded sources is outrageous, but it doesn't make your life harder.

      Wrong again. If I buy the data for a goverment client, you pay three times for the same data.

      What I'm trying to say, professionals might have a use for this, but it shouldn't benefit them that much.

      You don't spend much time analyzing aerial data, do you?

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    2. Re:Professionally? by geomon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I call bullshit.

      Fine. Give me the URL for free USGS data.

      It doesn't exist. It hasn't existed for nearly five years.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    3. Re:Professionally? by stampystamp · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, it's not a web application, but NASA World Wind was out before Google Maps. http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/

      I don't remember all the features, but when I last looked at it, it had a good zoom, which I like better than Google Maps. It also provides data from LandSat and USGS.

      Unfortunately, it's Windows only, and now that I switched to Linux, I have to use Google Maps.

    4. Re:Professionally? by Derling+Whirvish · · Score: 2, Informative
      Fine. Give me the URL for free USGS data.

      http://nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm

    5. Re:Professionally? by WhiteBandit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You mean like this:
      http://nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm

      or maybe this:
      http://nationalatlas.gov/

      Or is that not enough?
      I know they're not overly professional, but it's still not bad for something free to the public available through an internet browser.


      While those are some great and informative links, they are useless for actual geologic applications. The grandparent poster isn't talking about the pretty aerial photograph (orthoimagery) you see available in programs such as World Wind and the National Map Viewer. Those simply have high resolution aerial photography for a small number of urban areas in the United States.

      The grandparent post is specifically talking about extraordinarily high resolution aerial photography sets that can be put together to exam under a stereoscope, which basically allows you to exam a high resolution photograph in 3D, giving the picture depth/relief.

      This is useful in various studies, such as mapping past/potential landslide areas, mapping active/inactive fault traces, and determining relative elevations of various topographic features to see if they are related (just a topographic map will not help for this, since you want to see if rock type, erosional properties, vegetation, etc are the same between multiple features if you want to correlate them). There's a multitude of reasons for this information. It serves a great purpose when time/financial constraints make it inconvienent to go out into the field, or even doing preliminary work BEFORE you go out into the field, so you know what the area is like.

      These aren't available online or for free, and the USGS has extensive high resolution aerial photography for most of the United States. But you have to order it, which can be quite expensive (especially if you are a student/academic doing a research project) and the fact that your taxpayer money has already payed for this to put it into the public domain.

  10. Google Maps Now Cover Whole World by thewiz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just great! Now who's going to clean up this mess?

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
  11. Not just US and UK, actually. by richie2000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They have satellite imagery of a very large piece of Denmark too: Clicky, clicky, looks just like the real thing to me. :-)

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
  12. How far can you zoom in? by duncanbojangles · · Score: 2, Funny

    Woot! The whole world? Nude beaches of Spain, here I come!

  13. For Europe, there is a better map site by lokedhs · · Score: 4, Informative

    I find http://www.map24.com/ to be superior to google maps. Even for the areas which google maps do have map data.

    1. Re:For Europe, there is a better map site by Gorath99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I suspect that google may license their data/technology, if not buy them up altogether.

      According to their website, map24 are already cooperating with google.

    2. Re:For Europe, there is a better map site by wolfdvh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In the UK at least, Google uses Map24 images. One gets map24 images and that slick Google UI.

      From the map24 site: 'Due to the new cooperation between Google, Inc, and Mapsolute GmbH, maker of the unique mapping portal Map24.com, it is now possible to search for city maps in all European Google search engines. If you enter a city name into Google.co.uk, the first result list entry is a special link to Map24.com that brings up the corresponding city map. On the result page, for sure, the full set of the rich Map24 options is available to the users.'

    3. Re:For Europe, there is a better map site by rduke15 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't agree that map24 is good. It's cluttered, complicated, requires Java, and you cannot copy the link in the address bar.

      For Switzerland, there is map.search.ch which is great (and with a simplicity which reminds very much of Google). I don't know for other European countries.

  14. Re:Personally, I don't think it's worth of it by Trollstoi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Chicks sunbathing on roofs... just imagine...

  15. Re:Zooom RIGHT out by dustinbarbour · · Score: 2, Funny

    Better yet, zoom out and then recenter the map to somewhere that was on the edge. The map keeps going! We can never run out of space! Man.. Google really is the most awesome company ever. They even made the damn globe bigger!

  16. Re:They've fixed the distortion by jfengel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They didn't before? I don't suppose you saved a picture.

    So they botched the projection and that became noticeable once you got as far north as Anchorage. I know that's a pain in the butt for you Alaskans, but somehow I find it kind of cool anyway. I've made a lot of bugs in my career, but I've never managed to let the curvature of the earth screw something up.

    I tell junior programmers that the reason I can fix problems faster than they can is that I've already made every mistake they can possibly make. Somebody at Google has managed to screw something up in a way I never have. I bow to them.

  17. There is more detailed info for big cities... by rochlin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A lot of big cities are already gathering images and info (including satellite imagery) and making them available. Portland, OR (big?) has Portland Maps. Not as slick as Google, but it sure would be neat if google listed links to other map/info sources for a region you're looking at on their map. I think listing relevant links is something they can handle. Paris Metro? Utah Topo? Disneyland bathrooms?

  18. Re:Personally, I don't think it's worth of it by geomon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The maps can be nice and useful, but why the satellite view?

    Aerial views of large physiographic features is essential for watershed studies, landslide assessments, earthquake risk evaluations, etc.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
  19. Israel will be angry... by danimrich · · Score: 3, Funny

    When zooming in, the "Gaza Strip" and the "West Bank" are labelled first. The label "Israel" does not appear unless one zooms further in.

    --
    where's all that Karma?
  20. Making progress, but it's not Earth yet by Anonymus+Bosch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Google may be full of very smart people but they still can't geliminate the Mercator projection distortion (although this is an aesthetic gripe) Google Maps is a clever web app that gets around many of the limitations of the browser, but I'd like to see a rich client, something like the 3D virtual globe Earth from Snow Crash perhaps? It doesn't have to be real time but it'd rock if it was - even if it was time delayed. I'd pay USD$5 a month for that, mainly for the eye candy. Anyone else interested?

  21. Governmental Paranoia by Fromeo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    1. Re:Governmental Paranoia by ar32h · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Antartica looks funny

  22. political ramifications by djocyko · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is interesting how they dealt with certain political issues. Kashmir is a bunch of dashed lines. Israel, too. Taiwan is labelled as such. The only thing that really throws me is Hong Kong. I thought that was officially part of China for the last 5 years.. I can't figure out what is going on with cyrus and the many lines through it. Anyone know what's up with that?

  23. Ocean Floor? by RandomLetters · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looking at the satelite maps of the ocean it looks like you can see the contour of the ocean floor. Is this from the satelite photos or is this generated artificially? It looks like the resolution of the ocean photos are lower than the land mass areas.

  24. Now all we need is a cool body suspension .... by 3seas · · Score: 3, Funny

    interface and we can feel like superman or neo flying around the world...

  25. Shameless Plug (Google hacks?) by MasterVidBoi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been working on a full-earth terrain renderer for the last year, similar in style to Keyhole or Worldwind. The addition of worldwide outlines on google is wonderful, because yesterday afternoon I finally started to add a google maps data source to my application. Until now, it limited to WMS servers such as http://onearth.jpl.nasa.gov./

    It's not nearly complete yet, because I still haven't properly handled the projection google uses (so the image is off near the poles), and it breaks at high detail levels, but these should be easily fixed within the next couple days. It should easily scale to the best data Google offers in the future.

    There is one screenshot at the bottom of the page. The quality is fairly low, but that's because it's being rendered on a 5 year old laptop (I'm currently away from home).

    http://cs.ucsb.edu/~richards/terrain/

    I have no idea if I'll ship this with google maps support (since it is against their TOS), but it was fun to do.

  26. No, that's what Israel lobbied for by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After heavy pressure from Israeli lobbyists, the US Congress enacted "shutter control" specifically for Israel in 1997. Satellites using US technology aren't permitted to image Israel with a resolution of greater than 2 meters per pixel. That's why the images of Israel are so lousy.

    1. Re:No, that's what Israel lobbied for by Sprotch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The highest-res images were all taken from airplanes, they are not satellite pictures. The "Israeli looby" is therefore entirely irrelevant.

    2. RE: No, that's what Israel lobbied for by Gordo_1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's not what your link says... "Congress in 1996 passed an amendment which prohibited the sale by U.S. firms of images of Israeli territory with less than a two-meter resolution. This followed an effort by Saudi Arabia to buy a U.S.-made satellite for imaging the Middle East."

      The US government has access to what they want of Israel satellite photos, but the *sale* of high resolution images is restricted so Israel's enemies will find it harder to spy on them.

      oooooh, a government acting in the interests of its citizens... scandalous!

    3. Re:No, that's what Israel lobbied for by bug+brother · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Satellites using US technology aren't permitted to image Israel with a resolution of greater than 2 meters per pixel. That's why the images of Israel are so lousy.
      Right, it's stupid paranoia. It's not like they have neighboring dictators which repeatedly starts wars against them, or something.
    4. Re:No, that's what Israel lobbied for by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There are several known "political holes" in the Keyhole/Google database. Israel is one. The US has insisted on blanking out the details of the White House roof, and for some wierd reason, the entire U.S. Capitol is pixilated. The Baghdad imagery is high-res, but pre-war, despite the copyright date on that section. A big area just east of the Baghdad airport seems to have been dimmed out recently.

      But you can look at the former USSR in considerable detail. Check out the Kremlin, where you can see cars.

  27. Re:Personally, I don't think it's worth of it by Momoru · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I dunno for me its just interesting seeing other towns and stuff in different parts of the world. But I could just stare at a map all day and be entertained...

  28. Couldn't be any worse than the blacked out areas.. by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Certain areas are blacked out on the satellite view, quite a bit less creative than the fuzzing an overlaying of the roof images in the instances you give. Anyone in the area would know what the blacked out images were- and all it'd take would be someone physically going there to find out if they weren't a local.

    You might as well put a sign on the damn imagery: "Terrorists strike HERE!"

    I wish they'd at least be creative like stitching in surrounding countryside or somesuch so it's not so obvious that they're covering up for this sort of thing out of National Security requirements.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  29. satellite censorship by sjs132 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ok, am I the only one that thought to try this?

    First, I understand why this would happen, because of terrorists, etc... I would like to state right now, that I am NOT a Terrorist...

    But anyways, I was zooming in on cities and thought it was cool, I could pick out what house I wanted based on how it looked from the sky, etc..

    So I thought... Hmmm.. Washington DC would be cool to see... White house in reference to SIZE of other buildings ect... so I punch it up... and when I'm in full zoom, it looks as if the White House and the two buildings on either side have been "Censored"... Look at other building tops, they show peaks, vents, etc... all that building roof stuff... On top of the White House and the two other buildings surrounding it... NOTHING...

    Well, not NOTHING, but an obvious photoshop type hack to blank out details... interesting...

    Thats all... Just interesting... Once again, you can't believe what you see, and all media has some type of controll... Personally, there are very REAL reasons for this, and I don't have a problem with that particular example, but what about other places... You might not even know that what you see is not what is really there...

    Blurs on Lincoln Memorial, and other buildings also... this is now a game to me, find the censored images... new fun at google! :)

    I bet it isn't 2:45pm at the Washington Monument either...

    Just the type of conspiracy that the folks here on /. seem to like. :)

    Now... to Find Area 51... Maybe I should post anonymously... Naw... I'm sure they won't fin$%()*#^#(*%#.... {Carrier lost}

    --
    --- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
  30. Re:Personally, I don't think it's worth of it by johnlcallaway · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used maps.google.com during a recent home-buying experience, and it was very useful. It's easier to see the different residential and industrial areas for neighborhoods one is not familiar with. It's also pretty easy to spot apartment complexes, parks, golf courses, and how close a home is to a highway.

    One can also compare lot sizes to get an idea of residential density, the number of homes with pools (I live in Phoenix, so pools are very common). Being able to switch easily between maps and images makes it easy to determine what that big parking lot is a part of, such as a mall or a mental health facility. Fortunately, the images for Phoenix appear to be less than a year or two old.

    Some people may prefer to live next to a mental health facility, some may prefer the mall. All this info makes it easier to informed decisions about whether or not you want to live someplace before making the decision so schedule a home visit. Granted, it didn't always work out, I remember driving up to one place and telling the realtor to keep driving.

    --
    I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
  31. actually, there were a lot of changes by adpowers · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you interested, I've tried to make a full list of changes on my website. That website has side by side picture comparisons of the old and new. Some things they did as well: darkened minor streets, changed the projection, added one-way arrows, added some major building landmarks, and changed the size of the images being sent.

  32. Not at all zoom levels by fbform · · Score: 2
    there it is, squeezed in between Belgium (you don't see their name until you zoom in, too) and Germany, as usual.

    Are you sure?

    --
    Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
  33. Re:Nice going, jerkwad by jericho4.0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Classic. Equating criticism of Israel. the state, with white supremacy and anti-semitisim. Fuck you. The OP wasn't even criticising, just stating facts, yet you have to pull out that tired, old, card. Maybe the Jewish conspiracy theories would die if we could have an honest disscusion about Israeli politics, without screaming "Nazi!" and hiding behind accusations of racism.

    --
    "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  34. Re:Nice going, jerkwad by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    For an overview of the lobbying effort, see "MILITARY IMPLICATIONS OF COMMERCIAL HIGH RESOLUTION IMAGING SATELLITES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE", by Lt. Col. Peter L. Hays, USAF. He writes "Then, in June 1996 the Wall Street Journal reported that Israel was lobbying the White House to restrict all U.S. commercial remote sensing of their territory to resolutions of no better than three meters." The cite is "Israel Asks White House to Place Curbs on 3 U.S. Satellite-Surveillance Firms," Wall Street Journal, 17 Jun 1996.

    This is a well-known issue in the imaging world.