Slashdot Mirror


MSN Virtual Earth Revealed

jeremyw writes "A day before its official launch, MSN Virtual Earth has gone live. MSN appears to have been inspired by Google Maps in this combination of local search and mapping. Virtual Earth introduces a number of interface enhancements to the now-familiar draggable aerial web map, such as the ability to zoom in using your mouse scroll wheel, and a Location Finder to determine your location to determine your real-world location "using Wi-Fi technology." Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble claims the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday."

408 comments

  1. West to East, or East to West? So easy to forget by Monte · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hope Microsoft has their virtual earth rotating in the right direction this time.

    I tried to link to the original Knowledge Base entry for this, alas, it doesn't seem to be there any more.

  2. Hey! by bad_outlook · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can see my house from here!

    1. Re:Hey! by L0C0loco · · Score: 1

      Yeah, me too! Too bad the imagery is over ten years old. Well at least I can see what the house that used to be here looked like before we burned it down. Nice try anyway.

      --
      -- Instant Karma's gonna get you! [320848 = 2*2*2*2*11*1823]
    2. Re:Hey! by cycom · · Score: 1

      Well this is neat. It looks like they took streets and trips and put it on the web. Funny how my new version of S&T has my street name on there, and this doesn't...even though this is newer...

    3. Re:Hey! by Misanthropy · · Score: 1

      I looked at my parents house in a small town/suburb and it was an old B&W photo. But my cousins house in the city next to us was a very sharp color photo. Really cool!

    4. Re:Hey! by AllahsAvatar · · Score: 0

      Oh my god, there's a road going through my house.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back, one year!
    5. Re:Hey! by lightyear4 · · Score: 1

      sorta looks like MS got a team of kids together and made a superduper "map!"

    6. Re:Hey! by Bill+Wong · · Score: 2, Funny

      Damn Vogons!

    7. Re:Hey! by penix1 · · Score: 1

      That is because they are relying on the old USGS DOQQ for rural areas. Most larger cities have already updated their imagery thus the color. Eventually every community will be updated but that mainly falls to the community's funding to dictate when.

      B.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  3. ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    wow microsoft is just leaps ahead of the competition when it comes to innovation

    1. Re:ms and innovation by alex_guy_CA · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now, why was this parent moded troll? I think it is a very valid point, only spoken in an ironic tone of voice. MS is again showing that they get their best ideas by copying from their competitors. I think everyone would agree that this company has been doing this since they licensed the look and feel their basic OS from Apple back in the 80's.

    2. Re:ms and innovation by Momoru · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except that Microsoft had mapping, local search and satellite data first...years ago. The only thing they "copied" was the dragability.

    3. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and nobody (including ms) really cared about that ms mapping service. Now that everybody knows about and uses google maps, ms comes out with an updated version.

      It's the same as with the new IE version that is rumored to come out soon. MS did not care about it for the last few years (still no png support...), and even announced that html would be obsolete after the release of longhorn. Now firefox threatens their position on the (soon to be dead...) browser market and a few weeks later ms announce a new IE version.
      It's ok because they save a lot of money that way, but please don't call them innovative.

    4. Re:ms and innovation by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the things they *didn't* copy were updated data (can't find my parents' house of 15 years... well, I can find where it will be, there's just a shitload of trees in the way), colored satellite imagery, dragability that's *fast* (Google maps now drags much faster than before, and easily faster than MSN), and a street address search that works (a search for my apartment in FireFox freezes at "loading..." and in IE it says "no results were found").

      It's interesting how this very much works like a beta product... whereas Google's incarnation functions like a finished piece of software (while still carrying the 'beta' tag).

    5. Re:ms and innovation by Excelsior · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The only thing they "copied" was the dragability.

      Um, they copied a lot more than that. They copied resizing the map window to fill up the browser window.They copied the general color scheme. They copied the ability to switch between street maps and aerial photos. They copied DHTML layering to show point data on top of the maps. They copied the entire design for searching, navigating, and finding points-of-interest. And they copied it so closely, they made it cross-browser functional (you can damn well bet if Google Maps didn't exist as a cross-browser functional product, MSN VE would only work on IE).

      And they copied the most innovative part of Google maps - tile-based pre-built raster images to assemble dynamic maps. As someone who has developed GIS applications, I can tell you, while this may sound trivial, it is not. Google thought outside the box. The GIS community for years has used vector data to produce one raster image on-the-fly at runtime (like Mapquest). Instead, Google creates small tiled images at every zoom-level they offer and stores them on the server, and thus can produce a map at any location and any zoom-level, and offer it with "dragability". This is a completely new paradigm for interactive GIS apps. The old way does offer some advantages over the new way, but for web-based interactive GIS, the new way is pretty phenominal.

      While the rest of the GIS community was happily working to make incremental improvements to the old paradigm, Google innovated a new paradigm. MSN just copied it. There's nothing wrong with copying (well, until the USPTO grants software patents), but don't mistake it for anything other than what it is.

    6. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It still produces crap, whether they were first or not.

    7. Re:ms and innovation by Dark_Lord_Prime · · Score: 1

      "Licensed"? Did I miss a memo somewhere?

      The last I knew, Gates was shown a prototype of the soon-to-be-released MacOS, then coincidentally stole Apple's thunder by jumping their release-date with the amazingly-similar Windows.

      *shrug*

    8. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "faster than MSN"?

      In my trials, MSN appears to work faster than Google.

    9. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They copied the ability to switch between street maps and aerial photos

      This site has been available internally at Microsoft for a month or two now. It contained several features that google maps didn't have at the time (the most significant being able to view satelite data w/strees overlayed). Interestingly enough, two weeks after the interal beta, many of those features appeared on Google maps ...

      While I'm certain that Google maps provided a certain level of "inspiration" for Microsoft, I wouldn't dismiss it as simple blind copying.

    10. Re:ms and innovation by Momoru · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well no one can argue that the Google Satellite data is better, but you can't really credit Google "innovation" for that, keyhole gathered the data and they just bought them. Microsoft seems to have better mapping data from my experience, Google has some absolutely horrendous path finding...it quoted me a 23 hour drive from Baltimore to New Orleans...taking a route 6 fucking hours longer then Microsoft found. Google consistently fails at meeting Mapquest and Microsoft in any kind of long term directions finding.

      dragability that's *fast*

      This is certainly a matter of opinion or location i suppose, it seems just as fast to me

      Google's incarnation functions like a finished piece of software (while still carrying the 'beta' tag)

      Google maps didn't even have a bloody scale bar until last week, which is the most basic element of a map....Google has given me dangerously bad directions, and as mentioned above, horribly inefficient ones too. Google can't find things that are on it shows on it's map (Solomons Island, MD, Reagan National Airport).

      Neither solutions are perfect, i'm just a little sick of the damn Google fan boys here.

    11. Re:ms and innovation by greggman · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Any anything, Google copied microsoft.

      Microsoft has had a map server up for years
      http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=4&S= 13&Z=10&X=363&Y=2599&W=1

    12. Re:ms and innovation by Momoru · · Score: 2, Interesting

      hey copied resizing the map window to fill up the browser window.They copied the general color scheme.

      No doubt this is an answer to Google maps, but the things you list as copying are more like just "keeping up with the times". When Volvo first put seatbelts in it's cars standard, was GM copying this when they added it to theirs? When Mercedes put a Navagation system in their car and adaptive cruise control, did Lexus copy these? Or were they cool ideas that obviously a competitor would need to integrate and improve on? Does Google integrate traffic information in their maps like Microsoft and Yahoo maps? Microsoft told me a major road would be closed for repairs, Google told me to enjoy the road. Microsoft has been giving travel directions for most of western europe and a large portion of south america and asia for years, google only has North america, Japan and UK. Was Google copying microsoft by adding directions here? If Google adds traffic info, I'm sure everyone here will claim its some revolutionary new invention too.

      This is a completely new paradigm for interactive GIS apps.

      It's interesting you bring up the GIS applications, I actually have a degree in GIS and I can tell you that Google invented nothing new here. They are still using vector data with raster overlays. Their application of using AJAX to do it is the only novel thing about it. For instance have you ever used Microsoft streets and trips? You can drag to your hearts content on maps with that for the last 10 years.

      They copied DHTML layering to show point data on top of the maps.

      Both mapquest and Microsoft had this before Google btw, Google only made it look cooler using transpancies.

      Yes, Microsoft innovates on existing idea and doesn't really invent anything new. News flash, that is EXACTLY Google's business plan as well. Get used to the fact that neither company will come up with an original idea, but simply better existing ideas.

    13. Re:ms and innovation by Deviate_X · · Score: 4, Informative

      And they copied the most innovative part of Goggle maps - tile-based pre-built raster images to assemble dynamic ... While the rest of the GIS community was happily working to make incremental improvements to the old paradigm, Google innovated a new paradigm. MSN just copied it.

      I have to say that you are wrong about this being a google innovation, these ideas were developed and online well before either google maps or msn's virtual earth. map.search.ch is still in many ways better than what google or msn are offering - i really like th keyboard navigation.

      map.search.ch was launched in october 2004 google maps came later in 2005.

    14. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one, welcome our new drag queens^H^H^H overlords :P

    15. Re:ms and innovation by k8to · · Score: 1

      And it shows rail! I'm quite annoyed that google hasn't figured out how to add this.

      --
      -josh
    16. Re:ms and innovation by alex_guy_CA · · Score: 1
      "Did I miss a memo...?"

      Apparently so.

      from http://www.mackido.com/History/AppleTimeline.html

      November 22: Sculley signs agreement to let Bill Gates use Mac technology in Windows, if Microsoft continues to produce products for the Mac.

    17. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will people stop talking about terraserver? MapQuest was out there before terraserver. Terraserver doesn't have usable street maps, driving directions, local search, or a convenient javascript interface. It is in no way comparable to Google Maps or even MapQuest.

    18. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're exactly right. Hotmail would have stayed small, too, had Google not announced it was giving everyone 1GB of space. Basically, MS is reacting which is not what an innovator does. Once they had most of the market share in the browser world, they announced, as many of us predicted, that they were no longer going to come out with new versions of IE. But Mozilla/Firefox is causing them to react with IE 7. In fact, MS' history is one of crying, "Me too!" and then claiming that they're innovators. This last part they have to do whenever possible because it was their position during various legal proceedings against them. If they scream it enough, ignorant judges will believe it.

    19. Re:ms and innovation by HaMMeReD3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Google is just using a image pyramid which is a well documented algorithm. Using 1 pass over the map data, they can generate several levels of detail that can be retrieved efficiently over the network with minimal cpu usage. Rasteration of vector data on a per request basis is insane? Can you imagine what kind of supercomputer would be required if google maps did that now? I use Image pyramids at my work to do fast scaling/zooming/rotation of images, as it is quicker to parse an image map then it is to perform all the calculations on the fly.

    20. Re:ms and innovation by Snaller · · Score: 0

      And they copied the most innovative part of Google maps - tile-based pre-built raster images to assemble dynamic maps. As someone who has developed GIS applications, I can tell you, while this may sound trivial, it is not. Google thought outside the box. The GIS community for years has used vector data to produce one raster image on-the-fly at runtime (like Mapquest). Instead, Google creates small tiled images at every zoom-level they offer and stores them on the server, and thus can produce a map at any location and any zoom-level, and offer it with "dragability". This is a completely new paradigm for interactive GIS apps. The old way does offer some advantages over the new way, but for web-based interactive GIS, the new way is pretty phenominal.

      Ah, just like computer games have been doing for a decade (except the server part) - how every outside the box.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    21. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can't find my parents' house

      You can't fool us. We know that you live there too.

    22. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And they copied it so closely, they made it cross-browser functional (you can damn well bet if Google Maps didn't exist as a cross-browser functional product, MSN VE would only work on IE).

      It takes a /. reader to turn cross browser support into something evil if made by Microsoft.

      I'm in awe!

    23. Re:ms and innovation by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      And I'm annoyed it doesn't show roads in my country despite Google Earth doing it just fine. :-(

      I hope they do the database conversion, or whatever is holding them back.

      Google Earth (formerly Keyhole) is free in the version that supports roads there, so I doubt it's a commercial reason.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    24. Re:ms and innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And GeoCoord had tiling back in 2003....

    25. Re:ms and innovation by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Naw, I don't live there. I just take my dates home there.

    26. Re:ms and innovation by aug24 · · Score: 1

      And the UK Ordnance Survey was using the idea in 2003 on the MasterMap project.

      J.
      (MasterMap Developer)

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    27. Re:ms and innovation by Tesla+Tank · · Score: 1

      AND they copied beta. Pfft, if there's ever a Google invention. :p

  4. Not a good first impression by defkkon · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Typed in my home town including specifying that it is in Ontario, Canada.

    MSN Virtually Useless Earth took me to some little town in the US. Apparently, it completely ignored my criteria.

    I love a lot of Microsoft products, but if they're going to compete with the likes of Google Earth and Google Maps, they're going to have to do a lot better than this.

    Besides, the interface isn't nearly as clean and fast. Just my two cents.

    1. Re:Not a good first impression by ect5150 · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble claims the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday.

      Would that have anything to do with it?

      --
      I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.
    2. Re:Not a good first impression by EvilMonkeySlayer · · Score: 1

      Same here, it's severely lacking.

      It seems to be a case of Microsoft following and doing a poor job of it.

      For example, try doing a search for Leeds, UK and various incarnations. You'll get nothing, it seems only the USA exists on the planet with MSN Virtual Earth.

      Also, what is it with the needless compass pointing north? Does Microsoft believe that some people don't know which way is north on a map of the planet?

    3. Re:Not a good first impression by bryan8m · · Score: 1

      Well, the compass let's you move directions through clicking instead of dragging or using the arrow keys (I'm guessing you already knew that).

    4. Re:Not a good first impression by WarpGiGA · · Score: 2, Funny

      I did a search for 'Copenhagen, Denmark' and it only found some tiny towns in US, how rude!! :)

    5. Re:Not a good first impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean that Leeds, UK was not named after Leeds, Alabama?

    6. Re:Not a good first impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After having a search for my hometown (Montreal, Qc) take me to some small town in Missouri, I Tried specifying Quebec, which took me to Connecticut, and Specifying Canada (and later "Canada, as in the giant fucking country right on top of you") I got taken to Kansas.

      If the intent is to provide comedic relief, or to horribly confuse people, I'd say this is a fantastic piece of work.

    7. Re:Not a good first impression by Da+Penguin · · Score: 1

      I had the same issue. I searched for my address in "London, Ontario" and it decided to give me a map in florida, and change "London, Ontario" to "Winter Garden, FL" in the search box!

    8. Re:Not a good first impression by bryanp · · Score: 1

      Both Google and MS make the same mistake for my home. It finds the right street and city but points to the wrong house about 1/2 mile east on my street. Anytime someone tries to find my house with mapping software I have to correct them. I'm not sure where they get their address data from but I wish I could find out so I could correct it.

      --
      "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
    9. Re:Not a good first impression by the+real+darkskye · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Did he specify which Monday it will be working at full capacity, or is it just some future day at the start of the week *somewhen*

      --
      Music is everybody's possession.
      It's only publishers who think that people own it.
      Fuck Beta
      ~John Lenno
    10. Re:Not a good first impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you specify "Ontario, Canada" or "Ontario, Ca"? "Ca", of course, would expand to California.

    11. Re:Not a good first impression by Da+Penguin · · Score: 1

      1) Search for "Google" in "Mountain View, California". (This will probably happen for most searches, but this is the one I tried). 2) Notice how it adds "United States" to the place name.
      3) Click search, again
      4) Notice how it fails to give anything, unless you remove "United States" from the name.

      Microsoft sure is helpful; helpful to death!

    12. Re:Not a good first impression by arekq · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually you can report the problem to google here.

      I reported errors in their maps before and those errors are fixed. So I believe they do process the error reports. :)

    13. Re:Not a good first impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft has a history of this. The worst that I can remember is when they took over MapBlast... I recall Mapblast being able to find my cottage, also, coincidentally in Ontario, Canada, and give me point-to-point directions right from there. Then when Microsoft bought them out and incorporated it into MSN Maps, it can't even find the town in which said cottage is located. Way to remove functionality from a product...

    14. Re:Not a good first impression by Deviate_X · · Score: 2, Informative

      According the VE programmer:

      Virtual Earth was live between 4 PM (PT) Saturday and 10 AM (PT) Sunday as part of our final cheks against our production systems; so we are now back offline as planned and be officially (beta) live on Monday. Our initial release is only limited to USA and we will follow up with other regions soon after that...

      Chandu Thota's WebLog

    15. Re:Not a good first impression by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I did a search for 'Copenhagen, Denmark' and it only found some tiny towns in US, how rude!! :)"

      Google did the same thing when I typed in "Paris, France".

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    16. Re:Not a good first impression by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1

      Clearly you have never visited Ontario, Oregon. Well, let me be the first to say that they have a kickass RV dealership there. Next time you have some vacation coming up, check out Ontario. Just remember to thank me when you get back.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    17. Re:Not a good first impression by Snaller · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. Capacity is not related to ability. Its still going to look like crap and abuse stylesheets on monday.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    18. Re:Not a good first impression by jalefkowit · · Score: 1

      Copenhagen, Denmark is a tiny town in the US. Or at least it will be after the troops show up today. Microsoft is just a little ahead of the game here.

      It's OK, we've been assured they will be greeted as liberators!

      :-)

    19. Re:Not a good first impression by elrous0 · · Score: 1
      According to Microsoft, neither the street I live on nor the street I work on actually exist (in spite of the fact that I live in a metropolitan area and both streets have been here for at least 20 years). I guess I'll just cease to exist now too.

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  5. Weird distortion on building outlines? by philgross · · Score: 5, Funny

    What have they done to Columbia University's campus map?
    Microsoft Version

    (correct) Google Maps version

    1. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe it's rendered by the new Windows Vista...

    2. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by ackdesha · · Score: 1, Informative

      These two examples point out another flaw. Within firefox, I can use the back button to return to slashdot from the google map. The MSN version is doing something that keeps my back button from working correctly. I have to use my browser history to return to slashdot.

    4. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by muszek · · Score: 1

      MS hired Pablo Picasso.

    5. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by gabebear · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's maps of around ETSU are nearly worthless. It's sorta fun to see what things may have looked like a decade ago, but I like my maps to be updated. MSN has roads going through buildings that are 30 years old and a lot of missing roads, the few on-campus roads that are named on the map are wrong. I know for a fact that their aerial photos are at least 3 years old for ETSU.

      Microsoft's map of ETSU
      Google's map of ETSU(very accurate)

      And what's with MS's maps inability to render curved roads?

      Now I might forgive them for messing up my campus, but the WHOLE the map for Johnson City, TN at MSN has SERIOUS problems. (try comparing the area surrounding ETSU(Google's is correct).

    6. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's rendered by the new Windows Vista...
      I guess you'll just have to "buy" it now, and see...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by gabebear · · Score: 1

      The grandparent was talking about MSN's map data, which for Virginia Tech seems to be good(MSN map, Google map). For my campus MSN's maps are worthless

      MSN does seem to have a LOT more aerial photos; however supplimenting bad map data with old aerial photos just doesn't cut it.

    8. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by srk · · Score: 1

      It seems as if they do not store map coordinates with enough precision. Or may be the map data was screwed up somewhere during the conversion process from the original sources to the Microsoft Map. This happens sometimes in GIS (Geographic Information Systems) software but, honestly, this is a very stupid mistake. I've been in GIS business all my life and the last time I've seen anything like this was before 1995.

    9. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by acm · · Score: 1
      I thought you were correct in that Google Maps was the winner at the ETSU campus, until I tried to look at the satellite/hybrid version of the data from Google:

      "We're sorry, but we don't have imagery at this zoom for this region."

      From playing with MSN Virtual Earth I've noticed that their satellite imagery is at a much higher resolution, and there appear to be no image breaks in the satellite data where there are in Google Maps.

      I think Google Earth has them booth beat right now though.

      BTW, there is a ~30 minute informal video interview w/some of the MSN Virtual Earth team on Channel 9.

    10. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by LuxFX · · Score: 1

      That looks like a fairly common side effect of a raster-to-vector conversion process. I get the same thing in Flash when I try to "Trace Bitmap" with poor settings. It's the result of an automated process without anyone (or at least anyone that cares enough) overseeing the results.

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    11. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by pythonhacker · · Score: 1

      "And what's with MS's maps inability to render curved roads? [msn.com]" I think curved roads will be supported with the MSN earch SP1.

      --
      If you don't succeed at first, try again. If you still don't succeed, try harder. If nothing works, try reality shows.
    12. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by Jerry · · Score: 1

      I can't confirm your observation because it looks like the Microsoft website is SLASHDOTTED!!!!

      --

      Running with Linux for over 20 years!

    13. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by Snaller · · Score: 2, Informative

      Another interesting thing; google loaded in 5 seconds, after 3 minuttes the microsoft site gave up.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    14. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by gabebear · · Score: 1

      The main problem I have with Google Earth is that it only runs on Windows and Google Earth doesn't seem to really work with Wine.. Welll... seeing as I've never gotten it to work, that is the also the only problem I have with it.

    15. Re:Weird distortion on building outlines? by Rungchen · · Score: 1

      Its called artistic freedom.

      --
      You can get it fast, you can get it good, You can get it cheap. Pick two!
  6. Google uses newer satellite photos. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See for yourself.

  7. Just me? by Apreche · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is it just me or does it seem like all MS is doing these days is just copy catting google? Google made a better search, MS tries to make a better search. Google makes a map, MS makes a map.

    I think it's rather obvious that the creative type who comes up with the ideas usually prevails over those trying to play catch up. When MS makes something new and Google has to copy it, that's when you know the tables have turned.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:Just me? by Monte · · Score: 1

      Is it just me or does it seem like all MS is doing these days is just copy catting google?

      Not to start Yet Another Bash Microsoft thread ('cause lord knows around here MS is just sacrosanct :) but I can't honestly think of anything really original Microsoft has done since Microsoft Bob.

      Nobody else ever thought have having a little cartoon dog log you in.

      The ironic thing is that Bob (I still have a copy BTW) can be considered an admission of failure on the part of MS. It's goal was to make Windows easy to use. Gee, wasn't the goal of Windows to make the computer easy to use?

      Oh well, I like the little cartoons - when they're not being annoying (Clippy).

    2. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes because google maps was so original and inovative... .

      But then again I must be new here... .

    3. Re:Just me? by Mr.+Maestro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know, Ford makes cars with 4 wheels, and voila, GM copies them and makes a car with 4 wheels also.
      I'm not saying Google is not innovating, but what is Microsoft supposed to do? If they don't make a mapping software, then they are attacked, if they do, then they are attacked.
      Besides, I remember having a CD called something like Encarta Streets or something that was MICROSOFT mapping software long before google was anything other than a mispelling of goggle.

    4. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Packard Bell Navigator come before Bob? I think it was a better Bob than Bob was. It made the computer into a house without stupid cartoon animals to get in your way and eat cycles.

    5. Re:Just me? by Matt2k · · Score: 2, Funny

      Microsoft TOTALLY ripped ENCARTA off from the Triple-A. This whole idea of SELLING MAPS has been around for at least, what, 35 years or more. I think the guys at Apple invented it. Thievery!

    6. Re:Just me? by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 1

      When MS makes something new and Google has to copy it, that's when you know the tables have turned.

      OK, Google does some great stuff but lets not just give blind praise to them well trashing MS. MS Research really does some awsome stuff, it just seems once it leaves MS Research and is made a commercial product the implementation kind of falls short. MapPoint/TerraServer really pioneered the technology for these types of applications, but MS couldn't produce compeling consumer applications for it (probably because how do you make money with this). Really, I don't even know if that is so true as MS hasn't had the "buzz" around thier products Google is able to generate. I still prefer TerraServer (probably just because I'm more used to it), but you really don't hear about it anymore. There was some buzz surrounding it when it was launched a decade ago, but it faded as REALLY how many times do you want to look at your house from a satilite photo?

      Google has done a great job of again creating interest in these areas and have produced some compelling offerings, but to say Google created this stuff and MS is just following is a bit mis-informed.

      --
      "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
    7. Re:Just me? by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Would you prefer that google had no competition? Competition can be a powerful drive to improvement, after all.

      I think it's rather obvious that the creative type who comes up with the ideas usually prevails over those trying to play catch up.

      I don't think that's obvious at all. It's perfectly possible to take someone else's idea, improve upon it, and produce a superior product. After all, they've just done most of the hard work and expensive R&D for you.

    8. Re:Just me? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Is it just me or does it seem like all MS is doing these days is just copy catting google?

      You can replace the word "google" in your comment with the name of any company from the long list of defunct companies that threatened Microsoft in some way, or had something that Microsoft wanted. That's if Microsoft even bothered to rip off something good and didn't just bury it. Google just got too big too fast for Microsoft to be able to take care of them in the usual ways, so now it has to compete on Google's own territory. Now, time will tell who will prevail but it can't help but be good for us. I know that on those occasions when I can't get what I want from Google I'll try something else, and it's good to have something else there. Besides, even Google can use some competition.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    9. Re:Just me? by Mr.+Maestro · · Score: 1

      Dont forget the girl selling maps to the stars in the original Bad News Bears (haven't seen the remake)
      I think Google might owe her some royalties.

    10. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, Encarta is an encyclopedia.

    11. Re:Just me? by drsquare · · Score: 1

      You're right. No-one before Google ever had a search engine, or a map service. Google invented them, and Microsoft just copied them. What other Google original inventions will Microsoft steal next, webmail? Newsgroups?

      Seriously, it doesn't matter who invented anything, it's what you do with it. Web services are easy, I'll be impressed when Google make an operating system or an office suite.

    12. Re:Just me? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      You know, Ford makes cars with 4 wheels, and voila, GM copies them and makes a car with 4 wheels also.

      You'd be kinda ticked if your brand new GM car came with flat tyres tho. Oh - you wanted air in them too? Oh and that noise? Naw thats just the fan belt slipping, we can tighten it up for ya no problem, call us tomorrow and your new car might be ready...

      Yeah yeah, Microsoft has done a few original things in the past. That has absolutely no bearing on the fact that google maps today is way better than virtual earth today.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    13. Re:Just me? by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      Actually, being a "follower" can be a very legitimate business model - let someone else risk the R&D developing products that may or may not succeed, then follow along in those areas that have proven viable....

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    14. Re:Just me? by schon · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that only MS is capable of competing with google? Yahoo, AOL, none of the other big companies has any idea how to make search engines, or maps, or anything else?

      There are more than *TWO* companies on the face of the planet, you know.

    15. Re:Just me? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      It's not like Google created Google Earth. They bought it. And most likely Microsoft was already working on their product long before Google bought Google Earth.

    16. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you meant a misspelling of googol?

    17. Re:Just me? by Cromac · · Score: 1
      Is it just me or does it seem like all MS is doing these days is just copy catting google?

      Seems like it, but in this case I think the MS copy machine was low on toner. Why would anyone use MS Virtual Earth over maps.google.com or even better Google Earth??

      To bad for MS but this doesn't hold a candle to what Googles done.

    18. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's rather obvious that the creative type who comes up with the ideas usually prevails over those trying to play catch up.

      That's why Apple has 4% of the marketshare today, right?

    19. Re:Just me? by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      I think it's rather obvious that the creative type who comes up with the ideas usually prevails over those trying to play catch up.

      Sure, as long as the "creative type" can keep up with the pace of innovation in other areas as the big fish swim in on the original idea. The real money is in making one thing as cheap as you can and selling it to millions of people, and that's largely what business is all about today because money is everything.

    20. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think that's obvious at all. It's perfectly possible to take someone else's idea, improve upon it, and produce a superior product.

      For example, Microsoft seems to be providing access to much higher resolution sat/aerial maps in many locations than Google.

      This is a good thing.

    21. Re:Just me? by pilkul · · Score: 1
      Yahoo, AOL, none of the other big companies has any idea how to make search engines, or maps, or anything else?

      Er, I know you were trying to be sarcastic, but isn't that perfectly true?

    22. Re:Just me? by Pxtl · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, the problem is that Microsoft's competition is based on leveraging prior successes - not by actually performing better in a new market. They don't win by being better than the competition, they win by throwing money at the problem until the competition can no longer keep up, and then once they own the market they just milk it like a cash cow. Look at IE - nothing but minor incremental bugfixes for about a decade, until all of a sudden Firefox comes along and IE is booming with new features.

    23. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Didn't Packard Bell Navigator come before Bob? I think it was a better Bob than Bob was. It made the computer into a house without stupid cartoon animals to get in your way and eat cycles.

      as I remember it, running Navigator required 100 MB of storage on a system that would be lucky to have a 500 MB hard drive.

    24. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...long before google was anything other than a mispelling of goggle.

      Ummm, Didn't you mean 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000?

    25. Re:Just me? by kurtmckee · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Would you prefer that google had no competition

      I would prefer that Google had legitimate competition, not the type that Microsoft provides. Microsoft never steps into a market and works hard to do better than anyone else -- they step into the market with fistfuls of cash from their existing monopoly and use their brandname and monopoly cash to "compete" until they've destroyed everything in sight, at which point they shutdown all operations and move on to another existing market with clear non-Microsoft innovation.

      Why do you think that Internet Explorer has had the same outstanding deficiencies since 1998?

      Competition can be a powerful drive to improvement

      I don't believe Google is above having competition, but keep in mind that they've been producing the best search products for years -- they're light-years ahead of everyone else in just about everything they've touched. Google does their work without any real competition to hound them into being better.

      Microsoft isn't welcome competition, ever. Maybe if they produced results, but they've been an ineffective-products/effective-marketing company for too long to believe they'll start actually producing anything new in search technologies. And I say "new" because I find it hard to believe they can even do that, let alone "better".

    26. Re:Just me? by pythonhacker · · Score: 1

      Well, making an office suite is not a big deal as you make it out to be. Corel had one of the best office suites (WordPerfect) before MSN kicked its ass from PC desktops with MS Office suite combined with its monopoly. And there is of course the alternative, Openoffice. Why on earth should Google try to make an office suite anyway? :-) They are not in the desktop business, they are in the search and web information services business. An OS you say? Now that would probably make more sense for Google for trying to beat MS at their game. These guys have one of the biggest server farms running a fault tolerant multi-disk file system (Google FS). So writing a distributed web-based Operating System is no big deal for them. The marketing of that would be, but that is another story. If you stop to wait and look at the services Google provides now, does not www.google.com actually look like a distributed web-based OS? So, may be they are already there. :-)

      --
      If you don't succeed at first, try again. If you still don't succeed, try harder. If nothing works, try reality shows.
    27. Re:Just me? by t_pet422 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft had a MapPoint SOAP web service for 3.5 years, serving 20 million transactions per day. See mms://wm.microsoft.com/ms/msnse/0505/24675/Virtual _Earth/virtual_earth_2005_mbr.wmv (go to 8:15).

    28. Re:Just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Drucker would agree. In a 1996 interview with Wired Magazine, he said that the first mover "certainly has the pioneer's advantage".

      But may I respectfully point out that there has been no case in history where the pioneer became the dominant producer, whether you are talking about a business or a science. The most successful innovators are the creative imitators, the Number Two.
      the link
    29. Re:Just me? by mcrbids · · Score: 1
      I remember having a CD called something like Encarta Streets or something that was MICROSOFT mapping software long before google was anything other than a mispelling of goggle.

      /PEDANTIC

      Google is a mispelling of googol which, as a word, has it's its own interesting history:

      Its very name is a derivation of the word googol, a term invented in 1938 by nine-year-old Milton Sirotta to denote a 1 followed by 100 zeros.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    30. Re:Just me? by standards · · Score: 1

      Would you prefer that google had no competition? Competition can be a powerful drive to improvement, after all.

      Yes, I wish Google had competition to drive improvement.

      But Microsoft isn't doing it.

    31. Re:Just me? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying Google is not innovating, but what is Microsoft supposed to do?

      Die!

      If that's not blindingly obvious by reading Slashdot, I don't know what is! :-)

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  8. Appears to be slow and buggy when used w/ Firefox by Burz · · Score: 1

    OTOH it could be affected by Slashdotting.

    It keeps forgetting to load some sections of the map, and the scrolling crawls compared to Google Maps.

  9. More like "Virtual America" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's hardly a virtual Earth when searching for "Dublin" doesn't give a hit on the capital city of another country. With Google maps I can zoom down to street level in Dublin and plan routes. With MSN the closest I can zoom in shows me half of my country.

  10. Canadian Aerial Coverage Stinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's nice to see they put time into coverage. Anyone try an aerial zoom into Toronto. It's a big green blog until you get closer, then its got no coverage at all. Looks like I stick with Google Maps (not that I would have used Microsoft products anyways when superior alternatives exist :)

    1. Re:Canadian Aerial Coverage Stinks by defkkon · · Score: 0, Redundant
      Anyone try an aerial zoom into Toronto. It's a big green blog until you get closer, then its got no coverage at all.

      And yet, when you use Google Maps with Satellite view, you can see the shadow cast from the CN Tower.

      As I said in my earlier post, if they want to copy-cat and rehash what Google has done, more power to them. The thing is, they should be aiming to do it better than Google... or at least, just as well. Their current offering is definitely sub-standard.

  11. US Only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a load of useless rubbish then.

    1. Re:US Only? by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Microsoft did some market research and found that calling it "Virtual Parts-Of-The-Earth-That-Matter" was just too long. So they assumed the American audience wouldn't notice the difference, and since the rest of the Earth doesn't matter...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  12. Not bad by moonbender · · Score: 1

    First impression: not bad at all. It actually works in Opera (8.02) which I hadn't expected at all. Well, mouse wheel zooming doesn't, but I don't blame them. Dragging the map works, as does zooming with the widget. The space reserved for the map is way larger than in Google Maps - this is great, Google should take note of it. It also sports a version of what Google calls "hybrid" view, they call it aerial view with labels.

    --
    Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    1. Re:Not bad by Zagar · · Score: 1

      Better aerial resolution for some locations. For example, try Marinal Del Rey, CA
      MSN Google

      --
      YAFIRL (Yet another Free iPods referral link)
    2. Re:Not bad by seti32 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but check out Promenade Way in that MSN map vs the Google hybrid map.

    3. Re:Not bad by NaDrew · · Score: 1

      Using 8.01 (latest public release) I couldn't get dragging or zooming to work. Where'd you find 8.02?

      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
    4. Re:Not bad by moonbender · · Score: 1

      English version is here. Beware, though, the full name is 8.02 technology preview 1. The full version should appear soon, although it won't include the (basic) bittorrent support that was the reason for the technology preview release.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  13. Interface by confusion · · Score: 1

    The interface is a little cluttered, but it seems to work pretty well at finding where I am and zeroing me in on my current location, even though they were just using my IP address. Any idea how the "wireless" location service works?

    Jerry
    http://www.cyvin.org/

  14. International Support is Pathetic by aslate · · Score: 5, Informative

    Looking at London, i see a label with a massive expance of blank map around it. No London boroughs, areas, regions, anything. If i tried to find my house it wouldn't go very far. You can't even zoom in very far.

    At least Google had a great service for the areas they had up, then expanded it to the rest of the world. The MS map seems to have poor support all round.

    And setting aside the international support, this was very slow and seemed "clunky" compared to the Google interface. I do like the scrollwheel support and the use of the same images for various zoom levels, as you don't reload the map on every zoom.

    1. Re:International Support is Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this was very slow and seemed "clunky" compared to the Google interface. I do like the scrollwheel support and the use of the same images for various zoom levels, as you don't reload the map on every zoom.

      The slowless is because firefox doesn't render transparencey effect very fast, try close the box on the left. Also, they add a some nice interface elements such as the compass which allowing you to move in all directions and a large maps area.

    2. Re:International Support is Pathetic by WWWWolf · · Score: 1
      Looking at London, i see a label with a massive expance of blank map around it.

      Well, Google doesn't cover whole Europe yet.

      Look at Finland in Google Maps. They have national borders and a label stating what country this might be.

      Then look at Finland in MSN. They don't have city maps, or any fancy features, but at least they had locations of a lot of cities, which was far, far more than Google had! Even tons of very small towns too.

      Though in Google's defense, lack of features was, this time, a fun and educational thing. It was pretty fun seeing my home city from satellite, trying to find my home from the satellite pic (the picture was in wrong angle - they've now fixed it so that it actually appears from above - and kind of blurry so making sense of the features was pretty hard, but after comparing it to the city maps in web, it was possible), or my old hometown with just the satellite pic (following the waterways and lakes until I found something that kind of looked like a faint memory of something that I saw in the phonebook map section about a decade ago - and my own memory of what the town looks like).

    3. Re:International Support is Pathetic by BlindRobin · · Score: 1

      hey ferner if it aint mercan it aint reel...
      only reesin we put innenashnul stuff in innthin is so we nose ware thuh targits is...

      so thir...

    4. Re:International Support is Pathetic by jonm · · Score: 1

      How did you get to see it? Typing in "London" in its search, does not find the captial city of Great Britain (pop 7,421,228), seemingly too minor to feature.

    5. Re:International Support is Pathetic by bljohnson0 · · Score: 1

      It's not just weak internationally, it's also weak in a lot of US locations. My neighborhood isn't even shown correctly (it has streets coming into my neighboorhood that don't even actually connect to it), and on the arial view it's still completely undeveloped with no houses. My neighborhood has been developed for the last 5 years.

      Google maps on the otherhand shows my complete neighboor correctly WITH houses.

    6. Re:International Support is Pathetic by aslate · · Score: 1

      I did it manually, but it was interesting to see London disappear for several zoom levels. What the hell?!

    7. Re:International Support is Pathetic by Teun · · Score: 1
      I would say it's al but non-existent.
      The whole county of The Netherlands (Population: 16 Million) fits at max resolution in 2.5 pages. There are no roads, just a few cities on the map.

      On the other hand the US has decent resulution pictures but when I look at our companie's shops in the Lafayette LA. area I find nothing, these pictures must be >10 years old!

      But it works reasonably well in Firefox, I'll give 'em some time to get upto scratch.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    8. Re:International Support is Pathetic by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Looking at London, i see a label with a massive expance of blank map around it. No London boroughs, areas, regions, anything. If i tried to find my house it wouldn't go very far. You can't even zoom in very far.

      Fear not citizen! MS is fully engaged with all national security authorities. In light of recent events, detailed maps of London have been declared a threat to national security. MS is simply following local government safety precautions and preventing the release of security-relevant data to potential terrorists.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  15. Aerial photo limitations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know that google was not allowed to put up satellite images of certain areas around where I live, but I see them on the MSN map...rules don't apply to everyone?

    1. Re:Aerial photo limitations? by Axess+Denyd · · Score: 0

      Might be because the maps MS uses (at least the closeup b&w 1m resolution ones they have of my area) are publicly available from USGS.

      --
      ---- Watch out for snakes!
    2. Re:Aerial photo limitations? by enigmathegreat · · Score: 1

      Of course, those images are around ten years old, IIRC...

    3. Re:Aerial photo limitations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      also the road overlays do not match up with the arial photos.

  16. Isn't as detailed as Google by ZP-Blight · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At least for international areas, the maps don't seem to be as detailed as google's.

    Also, the interface doesn't seem to be reactive to me, might be slashdotted, but at least with google you can see it's doing something.

    I guess it's a bit early, should probably check again in a few days.

    --
    Zoom Player Lead Dev.
    1. Re:Isn't as detailed as Google by sriram_2001 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I see the exact reverse - at most places, it has 2x the details level that Google has. For example, Google's headquarters at Mountain View is shown at much higher detail. See http://blogs.msdn.com/sriram/archive/2005/07/24/44 2610.aspx for more

    2. Re:Isn't as detailed as Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "At least for international areas, the maps don't seem to be as detailed as google's."

      Well no -- if you're viewing an international area, you're zoomed out far enough to see whole countries. Of course it won't be detailed.

      Presumably you meant that non-US maps are not as detailed as google's?

    3. Re:Isn't as detailed as Google by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      The satellite images for the Tampa Bay area are much much better (about 3x the resolution).

    4. Re:Isn't as detailed as Google by klui · · Score: 1

      VirtualEarth has much higher resolution than Google Maps; however, I don't like Virtual Earth producing errored tiles on many occasions. It is definitely a downer when the empty tile obscure the area I want to see.

      It's Monday so I assume it is live. There are also problems with the interface's response. You see tiles filled in on many more occasions than Google Maps, where in contrast, the dragging/scrolling navigation is very very smooth and seamless.

      One other thing is that it's quite apparent that Virtual Earth's overlay is not quite as accurate as Google Maps. I notice a lot more places that have the overlayed streets lie outside the aerial photos'. I only noticed occasional places where Google Maps did this.

  17. *cough* ripoff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    another cheap ripoff from a company who hasn't had an original thought in years or longer...

    The worse part is it seems to be as buggy as their os.. Of course firefox is what I used so maybee it was on purpose.

    1. Re:*cough* ripoff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah you are right, oh wait

      circa 1998

  18. Virtual Fog? by uomolinux · · Score: 1

    First Impressions : The map itself is fine, zoom in, a little bit slow with Firefox, I guess the problem is not a problem on on IE ;-) Satellite : I did try to see, close-up view, like in Google map, of Montreal, CA, but I guess satellite pics were taken on a fogy day ;-)

  19. Your pen is perhaps too gentle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "MSN appears to have been inspired"

    Inspired. Yea, that's it, Microsoft gets inspired by the ideas of others. I guess it works if you have no inspiration of your own.

    And World Journalism continues to salivate at Mr. Gates' feet, calling him a technological guru, a bellweather, a visionary.

    And to think I once wanted to be one among them. Sycophants.

  20. Hyperspace is supported! by BillsPetMonkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    On the map view, zoom into my hometown near Birmingham, UK using "Road Map" view.

    Switch to "Aerial Photo" view and BLAM! straight in downtown Atlanta, USA.

    It's amazing. I never knew my hometown could do that!

    --
    "It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
    1. Re:Hyperspace is supported! by QuantumLeaper · · Score: 1

      I guess they want everyone to move to Atlanta, it did that the first time for me also, but every time after that it switched views just fine. Try find by IP address, it was only a few hundred miles off. The problem really isn't MSN fault, when I used to one of those IP address finders it used to tell me, I was in China. They are getting better, correct country and state this time.

    2. Re:Hyperspace is supported! by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Ditto, Atlanta first. IP address search was fine in Sweden. Just trying to search for Sweden, without caring about where I entered it, didn't produce the country at all, though... Guess I'll have to read the labels of the boxes, but a really good UI wouldn't require me to figure it out :-)

    3. Re:Hyperspace is supported! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      OMG, you found the legendary Lost City of Atlanta!

    4. Re:Hyperspace is supported! by devitto · · Score: 1

      I guess that's what they call "twin towns" ??? :-)

  21. Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by dachshund · · Score: 1, Troll
    More or less says it all. It has some weaknesses-- the aerial photography isn't as good as Google's satellite photos, and it's missing altogether at the highest zoom level. Also some of the image tiles don't load, leaving me with big holes in the map. I'm sure that's something they'll smooth out. Perhaps the only improvement I see is the inclusion of street names on the aerial photography, which is pretty cool.

    Otherwise it is Google maps. I'm really surprised they didn't make some kind of effort to distinguish themselves. It wouldn't have been that hard to borrow the nice features of Google without copying it so transparently. The downside of this approach is that it invites immediate and direct comparisons to Google, which is a more polished and cleaner product. Also, it hardly supports Microsoft's claims of constant innovation. (I can envision this being used against them next time MS makes an appeal to the public about how innovative they are.)

    1. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by BSDevil · · Score: 1

      Or you could click on the new "Hybrid" view in Googele Maps and get a semi-transparent overlay with street names and such.

      --
      Cue The Sun...
    2. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by bcmm · · Score: 1

      In some areas the aerial photographs seem to be black and white, with park areas tinted green.

      See this example (of the same area mentioned above with fucked up building layouts).

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    3. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by Axess+Denyd · · Score: 0

      The aerial photography isn't as good in large areas.

      In my area, the aerial views MS has are infinitely better even though they're out of date.

      Try looking for "Bowling Green, KY" in both and comparing the images. MS has older 1 meter resolution USGS aerial photos, Google has satellite images from so far out that you can't pick out buildings.

      I'm sure the coverage will eventually improve, but Google's satellite photos aren't useful in this area.

      That said, I really do prefer Google Maps overall.

      --
      ---- Watch out for snakes!
    4. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by Dazza · · Score: 1

      Whilst a big fan of Google Earth ( wasted hours and hours looking round at places ), for the very first place I tried to compare the MS and Google products, the MS product was *way* better. See:

      http://virtualearth.msn.com/default.aspx?cp=37.724 92%7C-121.920142&style=h&lvl=19&v=1

      vs the same place in Google Earth

      MS has far more detailed imagery for this area.

      --
      -- "I know that this is vitriol, no solution, spleen-venting, but I feel better having screamed, don't you ?"
    5. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are tinted green because you have the labels on.

    6. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by kevcol · · Score: 3, Informative

      Check out Google's campus from Google Earth:

      http://catatonic.org/grafix/google-google.jpg

      Now from MSN's product:

      http://catatonic.org/grafix/msn-google.jpg

      Pretty darn nice. Sorry for the folks in other parts who don't have good resolution in either product but for the SF Bay Area, MSN has the better satellite images (for now). The block I live on not far from the above shots was similarly clear. I could clearly see my car.

    7. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by kevcol · · Score: 1
      Heh- Glad to see Microsoft eats other people's dog food- One of the folks accessing came from an MS IP address. Note the browser: Up-to-date FireFox. :-)

      tide517.microsoft.com - - [24/Jul/2005:13:52:02 -0700] "GET /grafix/msn-google.jpg HTTP/1.1" 200 347875 "http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/24/12562 28&from=rss" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050716 Firefox/1.0.6"
    8. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For some places (e.g., Seattle) the images are exactly the same, but MSVE just gives higher res pics. Check out Husky Stadium here and here. The arrangment of the seats on the field for graduation, among others things, suggests that this is the same picture.

    9. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by MushMouth · · Score: 1

      In that case they even have the same copyright Navtec.

    10. Re:Google Maps with the serial numbers filed off by Baggio · · Score: 1

      If you look just to the south east, there are boats in Lake Washington that match up... either these ARE from the same source data or Google got particularly LUCKY matching them up like that.

      The more obvious question for me is why do Google's sat images appear particularly overburned? There is a sharp contrast to them that the MSN sat images don't have. MSN looks like the better PQ to me.

      --
      Time flies like an arrow;
      Fruit flies like a bananna
  22. I think I know someone... by afd8856 · · Score: 1

    Who's entirely too envious on someone else for the community they gather and the cool factor they have. Do you think Microsoft wants to change and actually get to the stage where they will listen to their customers and community?

    --
    I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
  23. Crashes Konquerer 3.4.1 by Skiron · · Score: 1

    Great... One way to exclude Linux, I suppose.

    1. Re:Crashes Konquerer 3.4.1 by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, you're not missing much. Google is far better. They can't even seem to line up the map data with the images of roads, at least not in Houston.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Crashes Konquerer 3.4.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is bug in Konquerer... Programs shouldn't crash.

    3. Re:Crashes Konquerer 3.4.1 by RiffRafff · · Score: 1

      They can't even seem to line up the map data with the images of roads, at least not in Houston.

      Nor in Harrisonville, MO.

      --
      "I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
  24. Back button seems broken. by team99parody · · Score: 1
    These AJAX applications suck when you don't quite finish them; since a lot of core browser functionality that users expect to work stop doing the expected thing.

    I can't right-click to open in a new window on the little links in the DHTML popup and I can't use the back button to get to what I looked at previously.

    Breaking fundemental core browser funcationality like this really sucks - because that consistancy is really the most important thing that made the Web easy to use in the first place.

    1. Re:Back button seems broken. by DingerX · · Score: 1

      Well, it also has supercool features requiring "A browser that supports ActiveX controls". Maybe Microsoft will soon release a "Tips for selecting a web browser" along the lines of their popular tips for buying a flash media player.
      I can see the "popular options" already:
      Does it support ActiveX controls? Many web sites offer exclusive content through ActiveX controls; a browser not using ActiveX controls won't be able to allow web sites to harness the full potential of your computer.

      Does it support only Windows XP and 2000 as platforms? Browsers that support many platforms are that many times more likely to become the target of attacks. Also, with a Win XP/2000 only browser, you know you're getting the most out of your Microsoft Windows experience.

      Does it have MSN as its default homepage? Some browsers default to a Google home page with very few options. For optimal surfing, be sure MSN pops up first.

  25. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's a lot cleaner? are you stupid or what

  26. Caution cross domain cookie exploits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    i was redirected via a 302 to this site

    http://msid.msn.com/mps_id_sharing/redirect.asp?vi rtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx

    why ? because Microsoft are up to their old cookie stealing exploits

    read here

    1. Re:Caution cross domain cookie exploits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I thought i would test this here is the exchange (using wget),
      $ wget -S "http://virtualearth.msn.com/"
      --15:53:52-- http://virtualearth.msn.com/
      => `index.html'
      Resolving virtualearth.msn.com... done.
      Connecting to virtualearth.msn.com[207.46.159.135]:80... connected.
      HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
      1 HTTP/1.0 302 Found
      2 Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:53:53 GMT
      3 Content-Length: 198
      4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
      5 Cache-Control: private
      6 Connection: keep-alive
      7 Proxy-Connection: keep-alive
      8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
      9 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
      10 X-AspNet-Version: 1.1.4322
      11 Set-Cookie: MC1=V=3&ID=84eedad050934b468e6136e0d4897a63; domain=.microsoft.com; expires=Mon, 04-Oct-2021 19:00:00 G
      ; path=/
      12 Location: http://msid.msn.com/mps_id_sharing/redirect.asp?vi rtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx
      Location: http://msid.msn.com/mps_id_sharing/redirect.asp?vi rtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx [following]
      --15:53:53-- http://msid.msn.com/mps_id_sharing/redirect.asp?vi rtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx
      => `redirect.asp@virtualearth.msn.com@2FDefault.aspx. 1'
      Resolving msid.msn.com... done.
      Connecting to msid.msn.com[65.54.192.249]:80... connected.
      HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
      1 HTTP/1.0 302 Found
      2 Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:53:53 GMT
      3 Content-Length: 198
      4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
      5 Cache-Control: private
      6 Connection: keep-alive
      7 Proxy-Connection: keep-alive
      8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
      9 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
      10 P3P:CP="BUS CUR CONo FIN IVDo ONL OUR PHY SAMo TELo"
      11 X-AspNet-Version: 1.1.4322
      12 Set-Cookie: MC1=V=3&GUID=ec4310e9ec8e4aafbee7e0f2d389a9ff; domain=.msn.com; expires=Mon, 04-Oct-2021 19:00:00 GMT;
      th=/
      13 Location: http://virtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx?newguid=e c4310e9ec8e4aafbee7e0f2d389a9ff
      Location: http://virtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx?newguid=e c4310e9ec8e4aafbee7e0f2d389a9ff [following]
      --15:53:54-- http://virtualearth.msn.com/Default.aspx?newguid=e c4310e9ec8e4aafbee7e0f2d389a9ff
      => `Default.aspx@newguid=ec4310e9ec8e4aafbee7e0f2d389 a9ff'
      Connecting to virtualearth.msn.com[207.46.159.135]:80... connected.
      HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
      1 HTTP/1.0 200 OK
      2 Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:53:54 GMT
      3 Content-Length: 6184
      4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
      5 Cache-Control: private
      6 Connection: keep-alive
      7 Proxy-Connection: keep-alive
      8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
      9 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
      10 X-AspNet-Version: 1.1.4322

      100%[=>] 6,184 35.32K/s ETA 00:00

      15:53:54 (35.32 KB/s) - `Default.aspx@newguid=ec4310e9ec8e4aafbee7e0f2d389 a9ff' saved [6184/6184]
      it seems that it also tries to set a cookie in the .microsoft.com domain even though you have never visited it, very underhand practice and these people are supposed to be part of a "trusted computing group" ?, why all this blackhat redirect ing if there is nothing to hide ? all that redirecting and url swapping when all i did was click on virtualearth.msn.com/

      perhaps hackers should just take out the msid server it would screw a lot of sites up and do surfers a favor

      ---
    2. Re:Caution cross domain cookie exploits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we spoke about it here before
      http://slashdot.org/yro/00/11/02/1639247.shtml

  27. Nothing new under the sun by Monte · · Score: 1

    Meh. I was using ETAK digitized maps back in 1990. Take THAT, Intarwebs!

  28. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Bob[Bob] · · Score: 1

    Why are you comparing this with Google Earth, rather than Google Maps - which is also browser based and works on your Mac?

  29. Interesting by Medieval_Gnome · · Score: 1

    Comparing Virtual Earth with Google Maps, it seems that Virtual Earth has far "noisier" data. An example should help.

    Look at this cloverleaf. The curves are all jaggedy.

    Now let's see what it's like with google. Much better.

    I know it's probably just different input datasets, but it still is an important thing to have roads look relatively smooth, instead of jaggedy.

    --

    :wq

    1. Re:Interesting by Gubbe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Think that's bad? Try comparing those scenes in the aerial/satellite views ;)

    2. Re:Interesting by Seanasy · · Score: 4, Informative

      They both get their data from NAVTEQ. If you look in the lower right corner of MS Earth, you'll see "© 2004 NAVTEQ." In Google maps you'll see "© 2005 NAVTEQ."

      So, they're using older vector data. They're using older imagery, too. For most places MS uses USGS DOQQs, probably from 1999. Google, for urban areas at least, uses more recent satellite imagery. But outside of urban areas, Google uses low-res Landsat imagery which is fairly useless for this application.

    3. Re:Interesting by hviezda14 · · Score: 1

      I've compared it, IMHO on MS version it is bad.

    4. Re:Interesting by Traa · · Score: 1

      Not where I live (San Jose, CA). Microsoft is using a satalite image that is roughly 9x sharper and more recent. Microsof t map VS Google map.
      There is a playground in front of my house with yellow umbrella's clearly visible on the MS map and not there on google maps. This playground was finished in 2001. So if I want to impress people showing them an satalite image of where I live I will be sending the MS map. If on the other hand I need to find some location, I'm sticking with Google for now.

      I hope Google isn't to shy about stealing features themselves, the zoom with mouse scroll wheel is neat.

    5. Re:Interesting by d_54321 · · Score: 0

      Compare MS image of Campbell Middle School with that of GoogleMaps
      Exact same image - cars parked in the same place (had to zoom in pretty close with Google Earth to confirm this) except MS's version is a little clearer.

  30. Oops, they left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sinai out of Israel. Good to see they got the West Bank and Gaza in there, though. Won't do any harm, no-one will complai.. BANG.

    1. Re:Oops, they left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      suck my big bad arab dick bitch

  31. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by xTown · · Score: 1

    Probably. But it seemed a lot less cluttered that Google Earth's when I tried it. *shrug* YMMV, I guess. And I still like the Road Map view.

  32. Nice, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given what Scoble said, I'll ignore it being terribly slow for the moment, but what the fuck is up with it having edges to the left of the USA and to the right of Australia? Seriously...

  33. Some places look better in google maps by Mocenigo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    1. Re:Some places look better in google maps by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

      Expect MS to release a hotfix removing that offensive building.

      (well, they did the same to some font...)

    2. Re:Some places look better in google maps by Mocenigo · · Score: 1
      They won't try to eliminate it, will they? It is a U.S. Naval Base, even microsoft must have limits...

      AH! You mean remove it from display ;-)

    3. Re:Some places look better in google maps by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

      Remove it from display... hmyeah that would work too I suppose.

  34. Re:Frivolous lawsuit... booooring. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK that not everyone reads the story, or even the write up, but can you at least try to read the headline? This thread has no relation to the one about the name dispute over Vista.

  35. Bad attempt at copying Google... by codefreez · · Score: 1

    For at least the area I looked at, the aerial photographs were in black and white. The slider interface acts a little unintuitively (at least in FF I had to click, drag, click again,) and oh...there appears to be nothing original about it.

    If Microsoft is going to "catch up" to Google, they are going to have to do quite better.

  36. Doesn't work on firefox on linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Does this only work in Internet Explorer? It doesn't work in firefox on linux. I tried to scroll in with the mousewheel like the summary said, and all it did was scroll the graphic up...

    I'll stick with google maps, thanks. I'd rather not use a webapp that's designed for either one OS or one browser.

    1. Re:Doesn't work on firefox on linux by satoshi1 · · Score: 1

      I'm using it just fine on Firefox under Windows, inbetween sporatic bouts of connectivity that is (there's an uber storm going on right now).

    2. Re:Doesn't work on firefox on linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it seams, it does not work with Firefox properly, as usuall.

  37. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you run Google earth? Its not just a map program, its a 3d globe of earth. Similar to NASA worldwind, but with google searches/information built in.

    This looks like a copy of google maps, which is a 2d map program, both of which are browser based.

  38. So.. by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

    Is this another case of "Some one else did it so we'll do a poor wannabe and attract Joe Nobody"? No wonder Vista is so delayed, they keep making side projects which just can't compete with Google.

    Give up, fix the OS then MAYBE we'll want to use your stuff not just mock you childishly.

    --
    I like muppets.
  39. That's what Microsoft's always done by arevos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft doesn't create markets, it attempts to take over young markets through agressive (and sometimes illegal) marketing. It aims to achieve a monopoly, which it can then use to lock its customers in, creating a long-lasting cash-cow.

    This is the technique used for Microsoft Windows, Word and Internet Explorer. It isn't always successful, but it is successful often enough to make a lot of money and annoy a lot of people.

    1. Re:That's what Microsoft's always done by Valacosa · · Score: 1

      Don't forget MSN Messenger. For some reason, when Messenger started coming with computers, ICQ just died.

      --
      "Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
  40. Re:Interesting - Rather sticky by uomolinux · · Score: 1

    Strange, when I go on the MSN example I can't go back, with google no probs ? ;-) Tks for these example :)

  41. Virtual Earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Virtual Earth my ass, it's Virtual US. Another US corp with heads that wont fit in their helmets. /dons appropriately sized tinfoil helmet

  42. Not very reliable by Theovon · · Score: 1

    Well, it doesn't work at all with Konqueror (neither does google), but while google maps works perfectly with Mozilla, the results are varied for MSN. Naturally.

  43. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Interesting

    NBC made that goof in the early '80s. They had a rotating earth in the intro sequence for their evening news broadcast, except it was rotating the wrong way. It was left this way for quite some time, too.

  44. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Ucklak · · Score: 1

    Yeah. I like how that scratch pad really gets in the way of what I want to look at. An those giant numbers on the target are much less obtrusive than the translucent + sign.

    --
    if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
  45. Misfeatures that bug me by team99parody · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The part that leaves me with a bad impression is that a lot of core browsr funcationality is broken which makes this really tough to use.
    • If you do a "local search" it brings up a panel with links - however if you shift-click or right-click on those links there's now way to open the new page in a new window.
    • If I hit the back button I don't go back to my previous local search results. Heck, somehow they messed with my browser button so the back button never leaves their site. I remember back when porn companies did this, but I don't expect to see reputable organizationos do this.
    • I can't right-click on the image to bring it up in it's own window -- a normal web-browser feature that is very nice for printing maps without wasting paper&ink on useless headers and footers.
    Basically, this page combines all the limitations of a web brosers with all the inconsistancies-and-difficulty-of-use of a PC application.

    The one thing that made the Internet easy-enough-to-use to make everyone comfortable with it is that all pages worked the same way (back button works) and all links worked the same way (same right-click-menu). Why does Microsoft feel a need to change this?

    1. Re:Misfeatures that bug me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you don't know where you want to go today...

    2. Re:Misfeatures that bug me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The reason it's broken is it's a java applet or something on non IE machines. If you right click, you don't get any menu at all. It's also in frames because I was typing in a search and it refreshed the window deleting my query string when the map finished displaying.

      I also noticed the alpha channel on the left bar. IE doesn't support alpha without hacks for png so I highly doubt it's straight html too.

      Google just uses straight html. It works well. It's faster to scroll and zoom and it can find my house.

    3. Re:Misfeatures that bug me by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      It's funny how this CSS works for IE, Safari and Mozilla/FireFox (when applied to DIVs, etc.):

      opacity: .75; filter: alpha(opacity=75); -moz-opacity:.75;

      One does not need to use PNGs to pull this off..

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
  46. Actually MS was first here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...These new satellite and mapping applications are just buiding on what Terrasoft was. Terrasoft was actually a clearinghouse to test and demonstrate MS-SQL Server. Neither Microsofts new service which is based on ActiveX nor Googles which uses a windows only client works for me because I use Linux but I have been using Terrasoft for years. Imagine that.

    1. Re:Actually MS was first here... by EddWo · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think you mean TerraServer.

      This new Microsoft service is not based on ActiveX, it is just HTML and JavaScript as is Google Maps.
      The only part of it that uses ActiveX is the "Locate Me" option, and even that is optional, where ActiveX is not available it will simply use your IP address to look up your location.

      Google Earth is a windows only client. But MSNVirtualEarth and Google Maps both work fine in Firefox on any platform.

      --
      "Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
    2. Re:Actually MS was first here... by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Google Earth is a windows only client.

      At the moment.

      But MSNVirtualEarth and Google Maps both work fine in Firefox on any platform.

      Ah, slow web crap *g*

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  47. Something odd about Ground Zero? by Kappelmeister · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm not sure, but I think Microsoft may be living in a bit of denial...

    On the other hand, it took only a week or two for them to update Flight Simulator!

    1. Re:Something odd about Ground Zero? by NaruVonWilkins · · Score: 1, Troll

      What the hell? This is just the old black and white USGS imagery? World Wind gives me this for free too, but with a better interface.

    2. Re:Something odd about Ground Zero? by noamsml · · Score: 1

      heh, by the time they get an updated map, there maay actually be a new world trade center...

  48. Better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Are you an MS employee by any chance?
    1. Scrolling is dog slow.
    2. The zoom effect is totally pointless, and ugly besides.
    3. None of the menus work.
    4. Aerial imagery, over my part of the world (northern Europe) at least, is really bad. At best I can destinguish my city -- In Google Maps I would be able to see my neighbours car.
    This is on Safari / Dual 2.0GHz PowerMac.

    My question is, why did they even bother?
  49. Horseless carriages by Monte · · Score: 1

    Ford ripped off Panhard & Levassor, the unoriginal SOB.

    Well shucks, every dingbat with a bicycle shop was building cars at some point... hence Chevy, Dodge, Lincoln et al.

    Um, I've forgotten what my point was. Oh, yes. France Pwns Ford!!1!

  50. Locate me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    looks like to be the latest way MS can spy on you. Of course, all the IP data will be loged for "statistical purposes" along with your Windows key.

    Honestly, doesn't anyone feel that this nearly useless feature is nothing more than an invasion of privacy?

    I can see how if you let the program running in the background, you will start getting special MSN ad's for where you are. "You seem to be on the Microsoft Campus. Would you like a free longhorn beta?" No!

    1. Re:Locate me... by key134 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I personally think that the Locate me feature is kinda cool. It may be useless, but much of the internet is. Plus, if it is only going by your IP, it can really only tell you where your ISP is located, not your actual location unless you own your IP.

      Anyway, I don't think that the Windows key is unique, is it?

  51. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by xTown · · Score: 2

    Well...because I'm dumb, I guess. I say that honestly, too, not as a snarky reply. I guess I just assumed that because they called it "Virtual Earth" they were aiming for the same thing as GE.

    And to betray even more ignorance...I, uh, didn't know about Google Maps.

    You know, I wish I could take back that original post now, just because I hate being stupid. But whatever; I still do like Virtual Earth, and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

  52. Satellite stuff is from Navteq by xmas2003 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Note the "©2004 NAVTEQ" at the bottom right of the aerial pictures - this company provides a lot of the raw data in that area. While the Microsoft copyright is 2005, I wonder why the Navteq one is 2004 - surely they are getting updates from those guys (?)

    Ironically, a few years ago, I put up some satellite photos of my house in Colorado ... and the Virtual Earth has the same ones clearly showing the drought of 2002 with a bunch of brown grass - not realistic to expect real-time imagery, but I'm surprised not a more recent pass.

    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
    1. Re:Satellite stuff is from Navteq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The imagery data appears to be over 10 years old for my house. Houses that have be around for several years appear as vacant lots. Same thing with the newer roads too, they seem to be missing from the images..

    2. Re:Satellite stuff is from Navteq by Gaewyn+L+Knight · · Score: 1

      Navteq is the copyright for the road data that is overlayed. The aerial images are stock USGS datasets.

      Both Google and MSN Earth use Navteq for the roads but google is using (at least in my area) 2003 sat images from a private source rather than the latest 1998 USGS aerial imagery.

      Just another instance of Google providing better data :}

      --
      Telcos have alot of dark fibre in the States. Most people assume that's optical fibre...but it's actually moral fibre.
    3. Re:Satellite stuff is from Navteq by whovian · · Score: 1

      Note the "©2004 NAVTEQ" at the bottom right of the aerial pictures - this company provides a lot of the raw data in that area. While the Microsoft copyright is 2005, I wonder why the Navteq one is 2004 - surely they are getting updates from those guys (?)

      Google's maps are (c) 2005 Google and (c) 2005 NAVTEQ(tm). At least by my parent's house the arial view is still at least 3 years old.

      --
      To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
    4. Re:Satellite stuff is from Navteq by WareW01f · · Score: 1

      It's easy to date photos if you have some frame of reference. In Minnesota we have the Severs Corn Maze (get it, maize maze haha, boy can us Minnesotans whoop it up!) They normally do a different maze each year. I looked it up for fun and it dates it as either 2002 or 2003 (they just had to have the same map those years.) You can see the past mazes on their web site through the path "Our Story" > "Past Mazes" > "More" x 5. (Warning, total Flash site ahead) Looks like they dug out the "Corn Maze" letters for the parking lot by the time the Google photo was taken. (Both 2000 and 2004 they had the year in the maze itself, would have helped here) MSN has a lovely black and white photo of dirt in the same place for the curious. No help there.... My guess is that we're getting recycled Terra Server photos Not a shocker, but with the change M$ throws around, you'd think that they could get some fresher (post 09/11/2001 at least) photos.

      Not to start another My Favorite Google Map thread... This was on topic.... really.

    5. Re:Satellite stuff is from Navteq by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      I'm sure that the Christmas lights were nice but I don't think satellites would be specifically ordered to snap a new shot of the house.

      Does anyone know how often the aerial images are updated and which areas have priority? Google Earth says that some photos are taken from planes.

    6. Re:Satellite stuff is from Navteq by sillybilly · · Score: 1

      They just want to know the locations people are curious about. It's old stuff, the guys in charge studied the pictures enough, they ran out of fun stuff to see, so now they show it to you too, to see what you're looking at, and they will look too, in case you can find something interesting. Especially if you're not looking at your own home, which is easy to figure out, from the phone number/cable account/dsl account that you're connected from.

  53. Maps older, less detailed, and B&W by vtrac · · Score: 1

    I looked up my town and saw that the maps are at least 4-5 years old, whereas Google's is about 1 year old. I can tell this because my town has been building the nation's longest cable stayed bridge, and MSFT doesn't even show the beginnings of the bridge 3 years ago, whereas Google Maps shows the bridge almost finished about 1 year ago (it just finished last week). The inferface is clunky, the slider sucks, and it's slow (probably due to /.). But, it looks like the MSN engineers just copied Google, down to the tiling, the drag scrolling, and even the unavailable map thing if you zoom in to far. It even says Beta next to it. I mean, if you're going to copy something, do a better job. It always takes MS until version 3 to do something right. Google better watch out...

    1. Re:Maps older, less detailed, and B&W by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

      Pretty dated: their aerial photo also shows two tall buildings in New York that havent been there since 2001.

  54. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In general, I like Google map but Virtual Earth's map does look better in some cases.

    http://virtualearth.msn.com/default.aspx?cp=38.896 552%7C-77.070432&style=r&lvl=17&v=1Virtual Earth
    http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Arlington,+VA&ll=38. 895976,-77.071688&spn=0.005545,0.010131&hl=enGoogl e map

    Google map doesn't display the name of the road (Fort Myer Dr.) that goes down from Lee Hwy (29). Also Virtual Earth represents the road as being separated into three streets with all going the same direction in a bit clearer way.

  55. Re:Appears to be slow and buggy when used w/ Firef by hazee · · Score: 1

    The scrolling gets a lot faster if you close the help panel on the left. Another bug?

  56. I can tell it needs improvement by strider44 · · Score: 3, Funny

    The cars aren't moving.

  57. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by Monte · · Score: 5, Funny

    I always assumed it was Gates' ego - he honestly believed the sun should rise on him before most of the rest of the U.S.

  58. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Viewers noted that MSN Virtual Earth, in contrast to Google Maps, seems to be entirely uniform and composed of a single color resembling BSOD blue.

  59. Old data by MoiTominator · · Score: 1

    Some of the satellite photos seem to be a lot older and more out of date than the photos that Google provides. When I compare images of my home town, I notice that MSN is missing buildings that have been in existence for at least ten years, while Google has them.

  60. wps location finding? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1

    You can install Location Finder to display your current location on a Virtual Earth map by using Wi-Fi technology.

    I don't have ActiveX enabled, natch, so I can't test this little piece of technology--but based on the blurb it sounds like it works via WPS which is interesting mostly becuase of what it's likely to do to the WPS competition.

    Can anyone else test this to see how it operates, if the tech was developed in house or purchased, and if it's accurate at all?

    --

    --
    $tar -xvf .sig.tar
  61. Makes konqueror crash by Chris_Mir · · Score: 2, Informative

    Visiting the site makes my konqueror crash. Fair enough, googles version also doesn't work for konqueror, but at least it doesn't make it crash.

    1. Re:Makes konqueror crash by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      I noticed this too, you'd hope this is accidental but then you know what Microsoft are like. This might affect Safari too.

    2. Re:Makes konqueror crash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      because of all the redirects
      when you clicked the link you actually visited 3 websites in a split second

      microsoft.com
      msid.msn.com *2
      virtualearth.msn.com

      read about it here (or just examine the headers for yourself)
      http://slashdot.org/yro/00/11/02/1639247.shtml

    3. Re:Makes konqueror crash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) If something makes your browser crash, it is the browser's fault. The proper way to handle *any* data, even if that data doesn't conform to standards, is never to crash.

      2) You actually believe that BS about Microsoft intentionally crashing Konqueror? Puh-leeze. Take a shower, leave your parents' basement, and try not to be so damn paranoid.

    4. Re:Makes konqueror crash by Captain_Chaos · · Score: 1

      Visiting the site makes my konqueror crash.

      Is that the site's fault, or Konqueror's?

  62. put it back in.. its not done yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a pile of crap if i do say so myself.
    a pile of crap..

  63. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by marat · · Score: 1

    This is a very common mistake. On the front-page of some IBM's web-site Earth rotated in the wrong direction as well (although site was in no way topography-related). Defect was opened. Solution? "In the next version the Earth will not rotate."

    I also saw it in the TV news heading (but not on NBC, it was Russian channel). Probably designers do it wrong in 50% of cases.

  64. Session Problem? by wirefarm · · Score: 1

    I went there and it didn't load properly, backed out to /. and went again to the site and it came up zoomed to (what looked like) a very specific address in what I think was Atlanta...

    It struck me as the kind of errors you sometimes get with mod_perl and Apache when you don't do things right...

    --
    -- My Weblog.
  65. Google Has Spies in Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If you look at the Aerial Photos of MSN Virtual Earth, you'll notice it has the Google Maps hybrid functionality.

    Now I bet that Microsoft was the first to do this, and that Google somehow knew about it beforehand and implemented before MSN Virtual Earth became public.

    Maybe Google employs some spies in Microsoft!

    1. Re:Google Has Spies in Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually the "hybrid" view has been available in the UK for years with http://www.multimap.com/

      now i bet that Google looked at all the map sites before deciding which ideas to crib

  66. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go back to your cubicle, fanboy. You have never used google maps, or are obviously out of your mind, or you think you will get something from Microsoft for spewing such untruth. Google maps is miles ahead of this unfinished, buggy, peice of crap. At least google makes SOME effort at including countries other than the US. At least google manages to overlay the road map onto the pictures properly. But what did you expect from Microsoft, other than the name?

  67. Re:Appears to be slow and buggy when used w/ Firef by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

    The zoom 'tweening' effect they are using 'blows goats' on Firefox (approaching 1 fps on my PC) but is quite smooth on IE. Maybe Firefox rendering needs optimised for whatever wacky stuff is going on in this case.
    OR MAYBE IT'S A CONSPIRACY AGAINST FIREFOX!!! ;)

  68. Yet another poor imitation by Theovon · · Score: 1

    Was anyone surprised that Microsoft copied Google, AGAIN? This is just another example of MS slapping together a poor imitation of someone else's innovation.

  69. Terraserver anyone? by jnkt · · Score: 1

    I recall when Terraserver went online (1998-1999?), it was oh-so-cool being able to watch satellite images on a planar surfaces.

    Well, I agree that Google's offering is currently sweeter, but all bashing aside, I give the innovative kudos to M$ this time around for an actual first.

  70. Microsoft Can't Compete by Ridgelift · · Score: 1

    Wow. Talk about typical Microsoft quality. I put in my address which is in British Columbia, Canada (which Google Maps & Earth has no problem finding) and I ended up in the middle of Nebraska. I had to give it address, city, province and country before it got it right.

    The program feels rushed, and doesn't have the same feel as Google maps. The name "Virtual Earth" seems to try and straddle both Google Maps and Google Earth.

    I've learned from the past not to count Microsoft out when it comes to their dominance in the marketplace. That being said, I can't see any reason why I would choose to use it over Google Maps. It will be interesting to watch the battle between Microsoft and Google unfold, both in the courtroom and the marketplace.

  71. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are an idiot.

  72. Different/Better UI features by mudbogger · · Score: 1

    The double-click is nice, to center the image and increase the zoom level by one notch. Some of the scrolling features seem potentially cool, how you don't have to click in the direction you want to the image to scroll on the compass, you can just drag outwards a little bit then change the scrolling direction by mousing-over another part of the compass.

    1. Re:Different/Better UI features by satoshi1 · · Score: 1

      IIRC, you can double-click to center in Google Maps too.

  73. Now we now why planet earth is blue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has crashed and it needs to reboot.

  74. Not so great performance on Firefox... by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

    It's pretty choppy compared to latest IE on WinXP. Probably due to the DHTML performance bugs on Firefox?

    Also, the scroll wheel should zoom in centered on where the mouse pointer is to be more useful; like how zooming works in Paint Shop Pro.

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
  75. More like MSN Virtual North America by phoebe · · Score: 1

    Search for Bangkok, finds nothing.

  76. vs google maps by N3TW4LK3R · · Score: 1

    Granted, google's interface is smoother and faster.

    However, the first thing I tried with both microsoft's and google's system is try to find my home town (in Belgium)
    Twice I was in for a disappointment: google maps doesn't even indicate ANYTHING in belgium (as a matter of fact, when it was first launched, it had even switched the names of Belgium and The Netherlands).

    Virtual Earth doesn't zoom any further than a large view of the coutry with the largest cities and towns indicated, but it does at least that!
    I don't care about how good it is for US map, I never go there!

    Sorry, I'm not a big M$ fan, but this time they seem to have done an overall better job.

    BTW It also seems to be working great in Firefox on FreeBSD :O
    Microsoft's pleasantly surprised me with this one!

    1. Re:vs google maps by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

      I don't care about how good it is for US map, I never go there!

      You should visit it - it's a really detailed country with a lot of roads!

  77. Old Photos by Dont_Shoot · · Score: 1

    Man these arial photos are old. My house was built 5 years ago, the naighborhood has been here longer, and the arial photo shows a field where my neighborhood is. They really need to get updated photos.

    --
    Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups.
    1. Re:Old Photos by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      That'll teach you to go faster than 88mph.

    2. Re:Old Photos by Dont_Shoot · · Score: 1

      I'm not ashamed to admit that you lost me. What are you talking about?

      --
      Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups.
    3. Re:Old Photos by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1
      Pah.

      In Back to the Future, Marty goes faster than 88mph in the DeLorean, and finds himself transported from his neighbourhood into a big field, before his neighbourhood was even built.

      This is slashdot, right? :)

    4. Re:Old Photos by klui · · Score: 1
      Some areas, I guess the SF Bay Area, Virtual Earth maps are more current. Take for example, the construction of the new Oakland Bay Bridge:

      http://virtualearth.msn.com/default.aspx?cp=37.820 93%7C-122.33545&style=h&lvl=16&v=1 http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=37.821260,-122.3350 60&spn=0.007375,0.013026&t=h&hl=en

  78. Nah.. by aerthling · · Score: 1

    I think I'll wait for Yahoo! Earth.

  79. Usual MS's modus operandi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How unusual! MS coming up with a poor copy of something already done by somebody else. This truly is MS's innovation at its best.

  80. Old aerial photos by suso · · Score: 1

    The aerial photos for my area (Bloomington, Indiana) are MUCH older. My house wasn't even built yet(Dec 2002) on these photos. In fact, most of my neighborhood wasn't built, which make me think that the photos are from around 1999 or 1998.

    1. Re:Old aerial photos by johnt519 · · Score: 1

      I agree. A local high school that was built about 3 years ago, at least shows mid construction on Google. on MSN, there's just a big wooded area. Not to mention, Safari (which I was surprised it worked at all), did show "22 errors loading page"..

  81. Conspiracy theory? I think *so*! by Sr.+Pato · · Score: 1
    the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday
    Is that why it was released ahead of schedule? Get the Slashdotting out of the way so that the official release date goes a lot more smoothly?
    Egad!
    --
    Nobody's gay for Mole-Man. :-(
  82. Nice by Snaller · · Score: 1

    If you have a mouse scroll wheel.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  83. Microsoft Unveils Google Killer!!! by mojoNYC · · Score: 1
    why wasn't this the headline? MS is so predictible in their marketing driven R&D:

    let's see what's hot these days, and then build a copycat product, and stamp our name on it, which is sure to make it big...

    or not.

    most likely, not.

  84. I found where I lived easily by Stone316 · · Score: 2, Informative

    and i'm in Ontario as well. I had to give it more information than I would google but that wasn't a big deal.

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
  85. Good, bad, ugly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good: decent interface. I like the bigger map area, and the fact that informational boxes can be eliminated to make it bigger. The overlaid locations and roads are well-done on the satellite images (but see below for alignment). Works with Mozilla. Prettier than Google.

    Bad: Miles and Yards only? Where's hogsheads and cubits? At least put km and metres in there too. Slower than Google maps (or did we slashdot Microsoft?). Apparently unaware of named locations outside the U.S. (e.g., search for London, England; London, United Kingdom, etc.).

    Ugly: Lower resolution images for many areas. Detailed aerial photos are black-and-white only. In some areas outside the U.S., when the location reaches a detail limit, the interface just ignores input (e.g., zooming further in silently does nothing, at least with Mozilla 1.7.8). Significant road:satellite image misalignment in many areas (more than in Google maps). Aerial images appear to be older (years older, in some cases) than Google -- whole subdivisions of houses are missing (I was looking in New Jersey).

    For a first cut, it is pretty good, but, as usual, they have a way to go to catch up to Google, with the exception of making a superficially prettier interface. It will be interesting to see how it compares if they improve the content quality and its extent.

  86. Teraserver by TheAncientHacker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's see. Microsoft did Teraserver back in 1998. I guess, by your own definition, the tables have turned...

    1. Re:Teraserver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and we all remember how often we used Terraserver to find a nice restaurant.

    2. Re:Teraserver by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Naa, that was just an inferior product that was never popular.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    3. Re:Teraserver by dustmite · · Score: 1

      Terraserver was also simply bought by MS, IIRC. But I suppose that MS's definition of "innovate" includes "buy".

    4. Re:Teraserver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google didn't create Google Maps, either. They bought Keyhole.

      But, ah, other than that, way to not show your double standard at all. Slashdot readers are so reasonable and scientific in their thinking at all, they wouldn't let something like corporate propoganda sway them at all.

    5. Re:Teraserver by dustmite · · Score: 1

      Could you point out where I EVER claimed that Google invented Google Maps? Because either I am losing my mind, or you are straight out 100% lying.

    6. Re:Teraserver by TheAncientHacker · · Score: 1

      No. Teraserver was written by Microsoft as a demonstration project for showing SQL Server scalability. Google, on the other hand, bought their aerial photo product. But, hey, why let the truth get in the way.

    7. Re:Teraserver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd only be lying if I had written that you made that claim. You did not make that claim (though you certainly made the implication), and I never said that you did.

      Who's lying now, bitch?

  87. Better Satellite Imagery in CT, USA by nherc · · Score: 1

    It appears that MS is using different Satellite imagery than Google. At looking at where I live in Connecticut, MSN resolves perhaps two more levels of detail than Google, but I'm sure this isn't the case everywhere.

    Does anyone else notice any differences in their areas?

    In any case, I suppose it's a win for everyone to have more map data at their disposal now.

    --
    'He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot.' - Douglas Adams
  88. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by nysus · · Score: 3, Funny

    I never assumed that NBC graphic depicted the earth rotating. I thought it was from the perspective of someone in a rocket circling the earth as he travels from West to East.

    --

    ---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.

  89. Longhorn... by Sr.+Pato · · Score: 1

    Knowing Microsoft, it'll be about 2.7 more years before they update the map.

    --
    Nobody's gay for Mole-Man. :-(
  90. I'll stick with Google Earth by nysus · · Score: 1

    I downloaded it a few days ago. It's now free and even better than the version released last year under the name "Keyhole." It's much less clunkier than google maps. It now maps out driving directions that you can see and print, too. It's a great time killer as well.

    --

    ---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.

  91. Yuck. by DirePickle · · Score: 1

    Google has nothing to fear. What a piece of garbage that thing is. Scrolling in and out doesn't work properly half the time, and when it does it brings my Athlon64 3000+ to its knees. Not top of the line, but I think it should be able to handle a map on the Internet.

    1. Re:Yuck. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Ironically, it seems to run very well on Safari on Mac OS X.

    2. Re:Yuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Agree. works well on my computer as well (safari)

      Didn't you notice that parent is a google sucker so anything else in the world doesn't work for him/her/it. Move on bozo.

  92. Why "Earth" if it only knows about USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the fuck do they call it virtual earth, it's not the earth, it's only fucking usa, I tried Paris, London, Moscow, Berlin. Nothing.
    Dear Microsoft, although you'd probably love it that way, but Earth!=USA, there're still other countries - until your government (or their actions) bomb them to debris.
    Now j/k aside. Why do they call it Virtual Earth?

  93. Lame Groom Lake Rendering by RiffRafff · · Score: 1

    Why is it that you can view Groom Lake from Google Maps in satellite/aerial mode, but this MSN thing has a No Photography icon over the same area?

    --
    "I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
  94. idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    truly awful. this isn't finished! When oh when are they ever going to learn?

    I wish they'd hurry up and just DIE! We don't need you, don't want you anymore MS.

  95. Re:Weird distortion: The Answer by rpcxdr · · Score: 3, Informative

    It appears that it is an integer rounding error. Notice how the MS lines line up exactly in the y direction, the x direction, or are exactly 45 degrees -- whereas Google lines are at the correct angle.

  96. It's so slooooooowwwwww... by skeptictank · · Score: 1

    now it's locked up.

  97. Actually, not bad considering that... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    this is typical MS. They are simply trying to copy what others innovate (mapquest => google => MSN). google did a nice re-innovation, while MS is desperate to have something there.

    Give them a couple of more years, and it will probably be good.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  98. 'may not perform at full capcity' ... hahaha by skeptictank · · Score: 1

    Microsoft metaphor for 'it's doesn't work'.

  99. Does Canada Really Exist? by samael · · Score: 1

    I ask mostly because I did a search for Toronto and got several options in the US...

  100. Bugs sure aren't out of the system yet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://virtualearth.msn.com/default.aspx?ss=woodla nd%20park%20co&cp=38.992868%7C-105.137923&style=h& lvl=13&v=1

    Note that all the businesses in Woodland Park are off in the mountains, while Woodland Park is off on the right :).

    Here's hoping that it improves. Competition, even if it's from Microsoft, will benefit the consumer. Even if Microsoft's got the town separated from its businesses, the image resolution in Woodland Park is much much better than Google's.

  101. Nice but not quite there by riflemann · · Score: 1

    It's nice to see some competition for Google, but it still has ways to go.

    One problem is that many of the maps are black and white...making it hard to see specific details if they're the same shade.

    The other problem is that the zoom doesnt go where I want it to. Center new york in the map and zoom in and I end up looking at woop-woop in new jersey.

    But at least it works in FF!

  102. Re:Appears to be slow and buggy when used w/ Firef by tzuriel · · Score: 1
    and proprietary:
    Space not available

    This MSN Spaces feature requires Internet Explorer 6.0 for Windows or later. Please download the latest version of Internet Explorer.

  103. Virtual Earth? by Alioth · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Except it's not really Virtual Earth - it's more Virtual United States. There's very little detail outside north America (just like Google)

  104. "But..." by Hao+Wu · · Score: 1
    I fully support the project. BUT:

    It is important to consider that criminals will be able to scout en masse and "high-throughput". The Russian mob will be casing your property from across the globe eventually.

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
  105. the site may not perform at full capacity until... by teodz · · Score: 1

    ...Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble claims the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday... isnt all of M$ products doesnt perform at full capacity?

  106. Idea source vs idea destination... by NetSettler · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is it just me or does it seem like all MS is doing these days is just copy catting google?

    Aren't they both just following up (slowly) on Neal Stephenson's idea from Snow Crash ?

    With all due respect to those "hard-earned" software patents the big vendors are sporting at every turn, I'm not sure that at this point in time that anything you see actually implemented was necessarily thought up by the organization that implemented it.

    For example, science fiction writers often write about things like communicators, phasers, voice interfaces to computers, teleportation, robots, and so on long before big companies implement them. And often those scifi writers get their ideas from other, less well-known but still publicly available technical journals, computer programs, fanciful stories, and so on.

    Society is rich these days with technological ideas, which is why software patents are such a bad idea. But while ideas are cheap, implementations are not. So I don't see that any of us are hurt by a second implementation of this complex idea per se.

    What we ought to be more worried about than where the ideas came from is where they're going. "Copycatting" is self-correcting because if the market thinks it was a waste of time, the cost will not be recovered.

    But meanwhile it's there and accessible. And especially as program APIs are added to these things, I wonder where people will point fingers the first time one of these is used as a targeting system for terrorist missiles.

    --

    Kent M Pitman
    Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

  107. 90% of our globe is missing by RokcetScientist · · Score: 1

    so this - and Google's entry - are perhaps a 'proof of concept', but definitely no more than that. The real work is only beginning! So I guess we'll be a few years yet before a really good - read: globally useable - 'product'.

    1. Re:90% of our globe is missing by KeyholeSeer · · Score: 1

      What is non-global about Google Earth?

      --
      Be seeing you, Seer
    2. Re:90% of our globe is missing by RokcetScientist · · Score: 1

      Just about EVERY address outside north America or the UK is missing, my friend. Add these 5,8 billion people's homes and you may speak of a global system. Not before.

  108. More by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Click on "See your location on the map." A window appears over the map with choices on how to locate yourself (why would I not know where I am?) Click on the upper right X to close the window ... nothing.

    The scroll wheel zoom is a little disconcerting. It zooms the current zoom level's map, and then redraws the map at the ending zoom level.

    Pretty fast but some of the images don't load consistently.

    The white text outlines in Google are easier to read. And Microsoft seems to over-label things.
    Google
    MS

  109. Performance by RealityMogul · · Score: 1

    One thing that jumps right out at me is how much the performance must suck for those with less than optimal video cards. When you double-click to zoom in on a location, it starts scaling the full-screen images, with a semi-transparent sidebar over it. At home I have a decent video card, although at work I have built-in video and it can barely handle the large flashing ads on some websites.

    There's also the whole issue of the satellite imagery being too dark. That's just disturbing. It looks like they took all their images during a power outage.

    One final complaint - the streets have "bumps" in them. Basically it looks like the street quickly shifts in one direction by about a full street width.

    I'm sure there's more things wrong with it, but thats just what I've noticed in a few minutes. Besides that, it looks like they need to up the performance of their web server. I get lots of broken images. Usually 1 or 2 for every full screen refresh of the map, either by zoom, or scroll.

  110. Age of Pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can tell you that the pictures of Orlando were taken on or before August 13, 2004 because it clearly shows my house with a couple of trees that got destroyed when Hurricane Charley went through last year.

    NAVTEQ also did not supply the photos. NASA did. Read carefully.

  111. Wheel Zooming done differently by med3D · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is really annoying, that zooming is done differently: google: wheel down: zoom in ms: wheel down: zoom out But this is an old problem with any CAD software. Which metaphor is used ? Are you pulling an object towards yourself (above: google like moving earth towards yourself) or are you moving yourself towards an object (above: ms like moving yourself towards earth). (BTW, pesonal note: I prefer the "wheel down=zoom in" and use this in our 3D surgical planning software for dental implantology, www.med3D.com)

    1. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by NickFortune · · Score: 1, Funny
      It is really annoying, that zooming is done differently: google: wheel down: zoom in ms: wheel down: zoom out

      Ah, yes. You see, this is a common misconception in the IT world. A lot of otherwise intelligent people think that just because Microsoft are innovating from behind again, that means they should conform to whatever de facto standards may already have been established.

      People are well aware of Microsoft's excellent track record in innovating with the ideas of others. So it is quite natural that when these people see a company like Google indulging in a spot of pre-emptive copying, they fall into the error of assuming that just because Microsoft came up with the idea second, that means they didn't do it first.

      Once you disregard this spurious and distracting datum, it becomes clear that Google have the responsibility to conform to Microsoft's interface. It's really quite simple.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    2. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Ark42 · · Score: 1


      Wheel up = zoom in, anything else is wrong.

      Left arrow moves you (the viewer) left, and the map thus moves right. Wheel up moves you closer down to the surface, and thus should zoom in.

      The most common 3D interface people are used to is going to be from any 3D FPS games, which work exactly the same way. Wheel up = zoom in (think any sniper rifle).

      I've used some game development related 3D programs a little bit, and some that supported the mouse wheel also used wheel up = zoom in.

    3. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by med3D · · Score: 1

      > Wheel up = zoom in, anything else is wrong.

      For a 3D FPS I would agree. You are a person moving yourself inside e.g. a building, then you would use wheel up = bringing yourself forward = zooming in.

      For a surgical planning software we use the other metaphor: there is a tiny implant, which is moved around a huge patient and observer. Wheel down = pulling the implant towards your virtual camera position = zooming in.

      The annoying part is, that ms (later to market) is doing it exactly the other way round from google.

    4. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by mdecarle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This phenomenon is noticable in sequential gearboxes: in one car you push the lever to go one up, in the other to go one down.

      All of these cars are made by companies that claim their system is right:
      ' You pull the lever, because as you accellerate, you are pushed back. '
      and
      ' You push the lever, because it means up. '

    5. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Ark42 · · Score: 1


      For map viewing software, it is no different then a FPS game. You are still moving your own viewpoint around. The annoying thing is that Google seems to have done it wrong from the start. I don't really want to download either of these, when the online map tools work just fine for me, but if they ever add mouse wheel support to the online Google maps, I really hope they have wheel up = zoom in.

    6. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only unforgivable fuckup is not making this configurable. It's just astonishing that Google Earth forces me to conform to its idea of how the mouse wheel should work.

    7. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Gaijin42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      uh, google maps doesn't have mouse zooming at all. There is a greasemonkey plugin that supports that feature, but surely you don't suggest that MS should follow greasemonkey?

      Google earth does mouse zooming, so perhaps thats what you were talking about.

    8. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by med3D · · Score: 1

      Thanks for pointing this out, indeed I was referring to google earth, but I realized this only after I had submitted.

      At the moment I am using only google earth, since it shows street names in Germany overlayed onto the satellite images, which is not available with google maps.

    9. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Trigulus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      huh? msn virtual earth sucks ass. the programmers should be wearing ribbons of shame!

      --
      If something exists that does not need a creator (god) then why must the cosmos need one?
    10. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by NickFortune · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it does. Really. That wasn't mean to be taken at face value.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    11. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by brunson · · Score: 1

      Oh, but that's not the correct interface you are describing, you mixing mouse metaphors with keys. In Google maps you grab the map and move *it* in the direction of the pointer motion. Therefore pulling the wheel towards you should pull the map towards you and vice-versa.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      Jesus loves you, I think you suck
    12. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Ark42 · · Score: 1


      Google maps doesn't support mouse wheel (yet?), but it does support the keyboard arrows, as well as the click+drag. The arrows work to move the viewer, click+drag works to move the map. Moving the mouse (without holding the button down) usually moves the viewer, not the object, in any 3D FPS type game, so the wheel should move the viewer forward when clicked up, and if you hold the mouse button down and move the wheel up, then it could move the object and zoom out.

    13. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google maps does zoom (on IE) when you drag the zoom bar up and down.

    14. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      Wheel doesn't seem to do any zooming for me, it only scrolls. Clicking the wheel produces a URL error message. To zoom in...don't use web's single click standard, use Microsoft's double-click protocol.

    15. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by mwg_stpaul · · Score: 1

      It does this now, via a button called "Hybrid". Looks like this was implemented at some point over the weekend.

    16. Re:Wheel Zooming done differently by steve_bryan · · Score: 1

      Google maps doesn't support mouse wheel

      Google Earth, which is the relevant product, does support the mouse wheel and has since before the product was acquired from Keyhole.com. Google Maps is a web application that is surprisingly good but to see the real thing you need to get Google Earth which is available for download at no cost (premium options are available for a subscription fee).

  112. I wanna know... by Mechcozmo · · Score: 1

    When is MSN Virtual Moon coming out? Virtual Mars?

  113. I know they said it might not be fully implemented by Stonan · · Score: 1

    but Google was able to tell my city was in Canada. MSN figured I had misspelled my city and offered me a bunch of selections from the US. It wouldn't even recognize the province until I TOLD it it was in Canada.

    (At least it was able to figure out I was talking about Earth without having to supply the spacial coordinates!)

    --
    The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
  114. Buggy by Trevin · · Score: 1

    Using the Firefox browser, I tried zooming into my city by dragging the zoom slider, and when I released it the slider snapped to the far 'out' position. So the only way I could get closer was to repeatedly click on the 'in' button.

    Then when I got to my street and tried the aerial photo view, the map somehow shifted halfway across the continent -- going from California to Georgia!

    Bugs aside, this appears to be just a clone of Google maps. Nothing new here (except maybe the WiFi locator, which of course I couldn't test because it requires ActiveX, and I run Linux), and certainly nothing to attract me away from Google.

    1. Re:Buggy by Yaotzin · · Score: 1
      --
      Error: No error occurred
  115. Is it beta? by achacha · · Score: 1

    You click on Georgia the country and it takes you to Atlanta, Georgia map... works just like all other MS products.

  116. Satelite Image Quality by ThaFooz · · Score: 1

    I like Google's interface better, and the scrolling seems a bit more responsive.

    But I notice significant differences in satelite image quality, and I can't say one is better than the other. I live in Rhode Island... MS offers much higher resolution photos of the RI coast, but Google's imagery of Boston is far superior (and in color). It seems like both services pull use a variety image providers (freqently the same ones). Anyone out there have any thoughts on the partnerships between MS/Google & said companies, or why one engine seems to do a better job choosing the best photo?

  117. Bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used the Locate Me (by ip address) feature.. It found my state but the satellite data was horrible. It looked like it was stitched together with polaroids. Theres all white borders and most of the imaging seems black & white and lots of it is missing. But a few minutes earlier I was browsing my state manually (by zooming into it) and it had full color good resolution images with no missing data. So it seems the locate me feature somehow causes you to look at different (horrible) map data

  118. How to compare? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    IS there a way to put latitude and longitude into Virtual Earth? I was trying to bring up this and/or this, but I couldn't figure it out.

  119. Wondering... by JrbM689 · · Score: 0

    ...which "Monday" will be the one MSN Virtual Earth starts performing at full capacity.

  120. LOL the future is already written! XD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And so the 'epic' battle between Google, MS, and other news sources begins! http://www.robinsloan.com/epic/

  121. Wrong. by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
    As was stated above (and below?) Google was not first with maps or sat pics. The only thing this takes from the Google book is draging and overlays. AND, the Microsoft sat pics zoom in CLOSER than Googles.

    I know that everyone here will jump on your Bash Microsoft wagon, but you ARE mostly wrong.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Wrong. by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      The only thing this takes from the Google book is draging and overlays. AND, the Microsoft sat pics zoom in CLOSER than Googles.

      In the US, yes.

      Elsewhere, the opposite appears to be true. Try zooming in on Melbourne, Australia in both, for example.

    2. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuthin' in Melbourne, Australia except goat fuckers anyway, so who the fuck cares? Honestly, do you even KNOW where Redmond is?

    3. Re:Wrong. by pythonhacker · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they should have called it MSN Virtual U.S . Microsoft press release: MSN virtual earth version 1.0 is fully supported only in the U.S . We are doing a market research in the U.S to find if the rest of the world really matters. If more than 40% of the survey respondents report that there are other places in the world that needs to be supported by MSN Virtual Earth, these will be added in MSN Virtual Earth SP1. Customer to MS tech support: Hey, whenever I open up MSN virtual earth it seems to load the picture of a big software campus. Is this a bug? MS Tech Support: No this is a feature. MSN VE loads the center of the Earth when it opens up. This happens to be the Microsoft campus at Redmond, Washington. Bye bye.

      --
      If you don't succeed at first, try again. If you still don't succeed, try harder. If nothing works, try reality shows.
    4. Re:Wrong. by k8to · · Score: 1

      Hmm let's see. Melbourne is a major world city and Redmond is an anonymous plot of cancerous sprawl.

      Seattle isn't even comparable to Melbourne in global significance, let alone a suburb of a suburb.

      --
      -josh
  122. virtual earth sucks by brianopp · · Score: 1

    this service is slow, and uses terrible aerieal shots... i still say.. why does microsft fight google... they will never succeed

  123. The World Trade Center is still there. by NickV · · Score: 1

    Wow... you figure they'd at least make this up to date.

    The World Trade Center is still in the aerial photos for Lower Manhattan.

    Now that's just pathetic.

  124. MSN Aerial Photo Quality is better by rochlin · · Score: 1
    The aerial photo quality is very good. I don't know if it's a group denial going on with some of the posters here, but every comparison I made between Google Earth aerial photos (Google earth plus if that matters) or maps.google.com vs. this new MSN service showed MSN significantly higher resolution and sharper in general. I compared seven locations in Portland, Los Angeles, and nearby non-urban areas. All were much better.

    Google has a much nicer and smoother interface (though the traffic today might be causing some of that effect). Competition is good! If Google can't handle a little (legal, non-anti-competitive) heat, than why put them on such a high pedestal?

    1. Re:MSN Aerial Photo Quality is better by Lothars · · Score: 1

      Well it does have better Photo Quality but it's the same old microsoft crap, which normally means bad interface, buggy, slow and just pretty bad to work with.

      I would rather use google maps than

      and who's to say that google can't handle the Competition

      the reason that google is on such a high pedestal is because most of the things they do are way better than anything microsoft has done recently

    2. Re:MSN Aerial Photo Quality is better by allgood2 · · Score: 1

      It's amazing aerial quality, why I can still see the Twin Towers when looking at zooms of New York. That's pretty darn amazing.

      I'm certain that detail will get updated soon, but for prosperity sake, here the Register article http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/07/25/msn_ea rth_deletes_aple/

  125. inspired by google maps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    who says google maps wasnt inspired by msn? just because google maps was released first doesnt mean they were the first to implement it. Slashdot is beginning to sound like some google fanboy site more and more.

  126. This has been said before, but... by vachigaggl · · Score: 1

    ...Google simply rules M$.

  127. Some good and bad points by chandoni · · Score: 1

    One one hand, they have much higher resolution photos of San Francisco. You can see the hammock on my deck, and you could have seen me in it if I'd been outside wearing a brightly colored shirt. On the other hand, although the photos of SF look fairly recent, the street names are at least five years out of date (compare Army St on MS maps to Cesar Chavez on Google).

  128. At least the Del Coronado is in color... by jpellino · · Score: 1

    .. in the Google version.

    I wonder who's supposed to be able to see the "coronado" spelled out in the sand.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  129. Let's make a test... by opablo · · Score: 1

    name me ONE thing that microsoft had originally invented and that i couldn't tell you about a better-older creation

    i challenge you.

    1. Re:Let's make a test... by SPY_jmr1 · · Score: 1

      Packaging and marketing of Bullshit?

  130. MSN virtual earth is quite good actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think Microsoft did a great job with this site. This is the first version and it has all the features of google map. Even the hybrid mode they added a few weeks ago.
    And on some areas (San Fransico, Los Angeles...) the zoom level is insane (2 or 3 times better than google's). You can nearly see people on the streets.
    Finally there are cool innovative features like locate me. And it works really good.

    I know this is slashdot so I won't go any further. But I do think that with a little more work this could be as good or better than google map.

    1. Re:MSN virtual earth is quite good actually by NaDrew · · Score: 1

      Something missing (and it's missing from Google Maps/Google Earth as well) is the ability to see the date of the aerial photos!

      Unless I've really missed it somewhere. I know TerraServer has or had this feature.

      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
  131. Sth Wrong w/ this Map by luxuguy · · Score: 1

    I typed my home's address and it pointed to a wrong house. I did this before w/ googld maps, and it pointed perfectly at my house ... W/ MSN, it showed some house that is a few blocks away from my house ... Check this out guys ...

  132. MS marketing still out-of-touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The web page tells me to "try cool Virtual Earth features" and "slick new features." Do normal people, who aren't in junior high school, really talk like this? Why is Microsoft's marketing always so tone-deaf?

  133. oops! by raminmtl · · Score: 1

    Looks like it's already /.-ed!!! Can't open the page!

  134. So that's why my Sunday is going so slow. by blair1q · · Score: 1

    I was wondering why today was going so slow.

    The Earth has been slashdotted....

  135. Cannot find server... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we have sucessfully slashdottet M$ =D

  136. Wow, a chinatown version of google earth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it me, or does this remind you of a bad bootleg video you can get in chinatown...

  137. Microsoft is so stupid. by The+Wallbrick · · Score: 1

    I mean, seriously. Shouldn't they just leave the duping up to Slashdot?

  138. For small country in Europe, marked differences by matija · · Score: 1
    Looking at the maps in both google maps and MSVE I had to admit to a grudging admiration: while Google maps only shows the general outline of the country, MSVE marks a number of towns (http://virtualearth.msn.com/default.aspx?cp=46.06 2684|14.505277&style=h&lvl=9&v=1"> MS VE vs Google Maps)

    However at this point MSM zoom misteriously stops working!

    I was unable to get a view that showed any more detail in the country. No error messages, nothing. It just doesn't work (perhaps because I'm using firefox?)

    Google Maps, on the other hand lets me zoom all the way to the picture of the capital, although the high res area is, inexplicably, several kilometers east of the city of Ljubljana, showing part of the suburbs and scarcely populated hills, instead of the city center which would have been more logical.


    Sorry, slashdot mangled the MSN link a bit.

    --
    Duct tape + WD40 => DevOps
  139. can't get there from here by aka-ed · · Score: 1
    Seems to be /.'ed.

    Perhaps some truly ambitious karma ho will mirror it.

    --
    I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
    1. Re:can't get there from here by Thanatopsis · · Score: 1

      I found a mirror here

  140. I think this is what they call... by Hershmire · · Score: 1

    ... keeping up with the Jones's.

    --
    if(!toilet_paper) roll.replace(new roll); //Stupid roommates.
  141. MS local a little more relevent by Flamesplash · · Score: 1

    Not exactly. I don't know if it's due to the underlying search or the integration but I tend to get more relevant searches for my suburban address. I live just north of Dallas and Google maps wants to give me hits primarily closer to Dallas, where MS's gives me hits around my actual address. Granted Google ends up giving me more ( maybe MSs doesn't reach out far enough ) but it looks like MSs local search integrated is more relevant.

    --
    "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
  142. hmm by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

    weve just slashdotted http://virtualearth.msn.com/ and msn.com is performing poorly.

  143. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, is it me or is this slashdotted?

    And on a weekend, too...for a company like Microsoft, this is just pathetic. What are they thinking? Google satelite didn't have any issues the first day. But I guess they don't run windows on their servers...

  144. He's Dead Jim by Thanatopsis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Stop it already, he' dead Jim. I think the servers got slashdotted. Never have seen Google go under in a slashdotting.

    1. Re:He's Dead Jim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Server not responding. Mod parent insightful.

    2. Re:He's Dead Jim by burns210 · · Score: 1

      The day Google is down is the day the internet dies. They are all about failover, uptime and massive, massive load balancing.

    3. Re:He's Dead Jim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is seriously pathetic. I've rarely, if ever, seen Google even have significant slowdown. And I haven't even been able to get Virtual Earth to load yet.

    4. Re:He's Dead Jim by tanthalas · · Score: 1

      "Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble claims the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday." Maybe you guys should start reading the blurb, at the least.

    5. Re:He's Dead Jim by aarku · · Score: 1

      *cackles and sends commands to his computer lab to keep refreshing*

    6. Re:He's Dead Jim by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      According to Neowin, Microsoft pulled the plug.

      It's supposed to be back in a day or so, when you'll have more exciting rides with MSN Virtual USA. :-/

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    7. Re:He's Dead Jim by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but this time they have an excuse - "Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble claims the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday."

      I propose that we resubmit this story to /. again on Monday, something like "virtual earth now going at full capacity! Let's see if it can handle the load :)"...

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  145. Re:Better than Google Earth in a lot of ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a rare thing to see someone being honest and non-snarky, such as yourself, on Slashdot. Your posts are refreshing.

  146. What do I look like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A goat?

  147. Anybody Have The Link To The API? by blazerw11 · · Score: 1

    See, Google succeeds by getting developers involved. They say things like, "What do you guys think?" or "Hey, what kind of cool things can you do with this?"

    Microsoft says, "Here are the most innovative maps in the world, bow down to our greatness!". Then, they step back behind the curtain.

    --
    A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
  148. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by SavvyPlayer · · Score: 1

    Let's hope the World's Most Sophisticated, Innovative Software Company can handle a simple Slashdotting.

  149. Terraserver was good at the time by melted · · Score: 1

    But comparred to the Google Maps, it's a horse-drawn buggy, while Maps is something like Porsche Carrera.

    1. Re:Terraserver was good at the time by TheAncientHacker · · Score: 1

      Wow, a six year newer product is better. What a shock.

  150. Hrmm in typical Microsoft fasion by matth · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The site is down..... google never went down when it got slashdotted.

  151. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by chefmonkey · · Score: 1

    On the internet, nothing is ever truly gone forever.

    (For those of you who fear clicking on ln-s.net links off slashdot [and I don't blame you], that link goes to http://web.archive.org/web/20011108213243/http://s upport.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q131/1/09 .asp -- but slashcode makes that look truly ugly).

  152. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still Slashdotted for me... :-/

  153. wow by crashelite · · Score: 2, Funny

    wow taking forever to load... nothing like MSN load time... wow aint it fast... oh wait... its loading... no wait here it come... damn and i have broad band and it is acting like 14.4k dial up... well i love the hybrid maps on google :) so i am sticking to google :)

    --
    (yes i know i suck at spelling fell free to correct my grammar and/or spellin i dont care, im still not going to change
  154. Slashdotted? by flubbergust · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or is the site down now? I cant get into it at all.

  155. /. effect by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft blogger Robert Scoble claims the site may not perform at full capacity until Monday.

    So I suppose us visiting it wouldn't be such a good idea. I can see the posting now:

    "Slashdot Crashes Earth"

    1. Re:/. effect by nberardi · · Score: 1

      Virtual Earth has been taken down until later tonight EST. /. really didn't have any effect on it. You have to remember these servers are huge and if /. can't take down MSN they probably can't take down VirtualEarth. Keep checking the blogs it should be back up later tonight around 9 PM EST

  156. Mirror anyone? by trime · · Score: 1

    Damn it, it's slashdotted already. Did anyone get a mirror before it went down?

  157. microsoft by SebNukem · · Score: 0

    it's just ridiculous how they to play catch up with everyone else. lol. keep innovating guys.

  158. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by Traf-O-Data-Hater · · Score: 2, Funny

    At least that's better than when IE had the rotating Earth throbber. That only showed the Americas and Europe, and left out the whole of Asia!!!!

  159. Terraserver - Better? :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the really old Terraserver that Microsoft has?

    http://terraserver.microsoft.com/

  160. They ment to call it... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Redundant

    VirtualUSA ;)

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  161. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by isorox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    BBC News made the same goof when they launched their TOG system in 2003 - small globe in the background behind teh clock at the left of the lower-third of the screen.

  162. MIRROR HERE by 2008 · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    I quit!
  163. Re:Frivolous lawsuit... booooring. by DroopyStonx · · Score: 1

    Actually, I posted this in the "Windows Vista Faces Lawsuits" story, so kinda amusing how it shows up here...

    Yay for /.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
  164. Yes they created Google Maps by Snaller · · Score: 1

    keyhole became "Google Earth"

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  165. Copying? I don't think so... by jxyama · · Score: 1
    Do you really think, given the size and organizational complexity of MS, MS can just "copy" Google and come out with similar products?

    I don't think the turnaround time is that fast at MS. I think given the tools and technology available, both MS and Google came up with similar ideas for an app - Google just beat them to the punch.

    Yes, that is one cool aspect of Google, but I don't think copying is what MS is doing.

  166. Search Problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two major problems with the search:
    -The street name wasn't listed ! The address for "Nisha Rao" (I don't know why her address is in there) is listed as:
    1000 St
    Sacramento, CA
    95814

    Its supposed to be on "L" St...

    -The numbering scheme changes when you zoom in.
    I searched for Sacramento, CA, and tried to zoom in on the location "Nisha Rao".
    It came up as point number 10 so I clicked on the "10" icon on the map and after zooming in the number changed to a 2. The search window changed correspondingly.

    Microsoft couldn't develop a Polariod photo, let alone software.

  167. Let's try this on a random Cupertino location by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  168. The question should be... by suman28 · · Score: 1

    You have to keep asking yourself, Monday of which year? and where are the APIs for this?

  169. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by SEWilco · · Score: 1
    Let's hope the World's Most Sophisticated, Innovative Software Company can handle a simple Slashdotting.

    It can, as long as all Slashdotters have the Microsoft Assisted Cache Cash-Depletion Enhancement Booster (with proper patches).

  170. Re:West to East, or East to West? So easy to forge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...he [Billy g.] honestly believed the sun should rise on him before most of the rest of the U.S.

    If he'd have really wanted that, then he would have placed the Microsoft Offices somewhere on the East Coast. In case you were wondering, the sun rises over there long before it rises in Redmond, Washington.

  171. First impressions: Clunky, ugly by RomulusNR · · Score: 1

    First impressions of Virtual Earth:

    The "zoom" feature is annoying as hell. Clicking from the main map, the image "zooms" -- as in zooming a static image, complete with ugly mosaic side-effect -- to about 4x size, then jumps down to the actual imagery of the next level at 2x.

    The labels on streets and other items in the hybrid satellite view are much, much harder to read than Google's. The street lines are barely visible above the imagery.

    And then there's the imagery. This is just good old Terraserver data -- that is, ugly black and white and more than eigth years old in most places.

    Then there's Virtual Earth's embarrasing zoom feature. In most places, maximum zoom is not available.

    Microsoft admits its Local Search doesn't even come close to Google's, limited only to inner urban areas. How helpful.

    You can't do a simple click-pan -- double click comes with an implied zoom. Counterproductive if you're using double-click repeatedly to continuously pan (which is sometimes a lot more convenient than constant repeated mouse-drag).

    Images load embarrasingly slowly. Google's had some bouts of image gaps in loading, but MSVE unapologetically drops its tiles in place while you watch, often with lots of gaps. Some gaps don't ever fill in -- eventually any Google maps gap will fill in, but in MSVE quickly gives up and the missing tiles appear as ugly missing-image placeholders.

    As is typical with any MS application, it's bloated. The UI is graphics-heavy. Google is smart to spend its loading and graphics effort on the actual important part of the application (the MAPS, you know?), while MS can't resist against putting lots of high-res graphics in its presentation and controls.

    And the final killer reason why Google Maps trumps MSVE: Google Maps API.

    --
    Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
  172. What A Piece Of Junk by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 1

    If this is their answer to google maps....then I want google to stop everything they are doing and start working on an operating system pronto!

    Comparing this pile of crap to even the earliest beta's of google maps is like comparing a yugo in the junkyard to a ferrari just off the line.

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  173. Wayback machine + Maps service by PabloHoffman · · Score: 1

    Shit, it's a pity the Internet Wayback machine obey (Google Maps) robots.txt rules. Otherwise, our sons and grandsons could easily take a sneak peek at how earth was several years ago.

    --
    If life would be eternal, we wouldn't fear the death.