Slashdot Mirror
Do You Recommend Google Maps API or Microsoft Live Maps?
KSobby writes "The organization that I work for is going to be redoing our website in .Net/AJAX. On the site, our members will have profile pages listing where their organizations are located (our members are scattered throughout the world) as well as other pertinent information for the general public. It is a non-profit organization, so funds are tight. My question to you: If we include maps, which API do we go with: Google or Microsoft? We're in a Microsoft environment (we're non-profit and Microsoft basically gives us everything for free) but the ubiquity of Google may be enough to sway us. Has anyone used either extensively? Used them in conjunction with .Net?"
I've implemented a solution based on Live Maps, and I was pretty happy. Not having used Google's, I can't provide tit-vs-tat comparison, but I know enough to tell you that MS's API is intuitive and easy to pick up.
About to make the switch to Microsoft Live Maps, I find Google maps to slow to load, if they load at all. Of course there isn't anything stopping you trying both and choosing the best that suits your needs.
I recently discovered MapCruncher which is a super cool add-on for the Microsoft Virtual Earth API. Basically, if you have any of your own high resolution maps (like PDF of a floorplan or bicycle route or whatever) you can align it to Virtual Earth and MapCruncher writes the thousands of tiny image tiles needed to make your map easily browsable right on top of Virtual Earth. Google doesn't have anything like this. (Even though Google Earth has an "image overlay" feature, they have nothing that runs in the browser, plus it forces the user to download the entire overlay image instead of just the tiny pieces they're trying to view.)
MapCruncher rocks!
Redfin did a decent writeup at the beginning of the year when they were deciding what technology to use. It was helpful to read when I was making the decision for the company I work for. Some of the things they point out have changed/been fixed, but it's still a good overview.
Privacy Group Gives Google Lowest Possible Grade
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
I'll say. The entire city of Philadelphia is missing, and it's not exactly a small city. In fact, looking at the eastern US, it's pretty much useless at this point. Alas.
I don't know, but it works for me.
Really. Don't want to get stucked by one of the numerous webmap providers? Use OpenLayers.org. OpenLayers, open source, will legally allow you to connect to Google, Microsoft, Yahoo! and other providers' data and switch between any without ever changin your code. No jokes, this is the best choice. Of course, it allows you to do *much* more. Want to learn more? Also, OpenLayers works perfectly with other widely used webmapping software, such as GeoServer.org and many others. See also the webmapping section over Slashgeo.org. (Yes I'm one of the founders, but it's really on-topic! :-) Why not read this entry on the webmapping APIs and data access.
Animoog.org
Do both. Seriously.
One of the oldest rules a downstream manufacturer (that's you) should follow is "avoid supplier lock-in". If you code with only one of these software titans in mind, you're subject to their terms. If you code for both, you can tell one vendor to zark off and/or play one rep against the other at pricing/ad-rev negotiation time.
Oh wait - you're a small non-profit with free Microsoft software? In that case there's no reason not to go with Microsoft. Development in 100% Microsoft tools is better than anything Google has...
One of the really nice things about Google maps is the same API is used for google maps and google earth. Well, maps uses a subset.
So you can easily do pretty-ultra-eyecandy that also works well when viewed just through the web.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Maps are all about accuracy. Microsoft has more coverage with high res imagery (I can see my house from here!) but some of their street data is several years out of date.
For example, when I-74 was built, McKinney Road was re-routed to Hwy 601. The map has the correct positioning for I-74, but it still shows the old path of McKinney Road, even though the new path is visible in the image.
On the other hand, Google shows the roads correctly, but you can't zoom in the imagery nearly as close.
So its a matter of priorities. Do you want accurate or pretty?
I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
Microsoft. It took me 4 hours to port our software to Vista, and that mostly had to do with a (nonMS) driver and a (MS) dll issue. The trick to MS backwards compatibility is to not use the undocumented shit. SimCity broke when they went to 95 (they actually installed a patch in the OS for it for compatibility reasons), because of undocumented "features". Case in point, the permissions that they set up in XP were ignored by most developers because everyone ran in Admin mode. Then, they get to Vista, and "Accept or Deny" became famous overnight. Our installer, and our software, followed the annoying rules in XP on the offchance that someone was running as a regular user. Hence, when we ported over to Vista, the only time users had to verify the softwares intention was when installing the first time/patches. And that's a good time to pop that box up.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
I set up a website for a brick-and-mortar store about seven months ago on my Mac. I then went to Google's maps and provided a link for directions. Then Google quit working with Safari browsers. Now, I know Apple's browser has its problems and has so many that many Mac users are not using the Apple-supplied beta browser because of problems with their release version but I cannot afford for anyone to not be able to load a map due to a problem with someone's map API. So I switched the website to use Mapquest.
Yes, I know that Mapquest is a slag-heap of a company since AO-Hell purchased it. I also know they're not innovating, they're just resting on their laurels and being used to provide AO-Hell with cash. But it works with all browsers I tested on Windows and Macintosh platforms, including some pretty obscure ones like iCab and Netscape's Navigator 2.0. Unless of until I get absolute assurances from Google that they'll never roll out new code again unless they test it first, I'm not using Google Maps for anything.
Haven't tried Microsoft's. Probably won't either as they won't work well with Macs or Linux or Unix and I cannot afford to disenfranchise anyone.
Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
Here's a comparison that I saw a while back on the dev blog for redfin.com.
[javac] 100 errors
You mean the link that says "Privacy Policy" at the bottom of the Google Maps API page which links to, maybe, the google privacy policy doesn't actually exist?
Dang. My mind is more powerful than I thought!
(for reference, the MS Maps privacy policy is here).
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.