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?"
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=maps&btnG=Search
It's the same product, but Google maps works with more browsers. Sounds like an easy choice to me.
I say go with Google. If their map system suddenly changes they'll at least be smart enough to include legacy support or do something remotely responsible and there's no way that their entire map system would just disappear. As for Microsoft, they change their names and systems more often than I change my pants and if suddenly all of that new Microsoft Live crap disappeared, nobody would be surprised at all. Just think how many new Microsoft inventions/projects/experiments there were that either didn't do well enough so they cut them or they did really well and they cut them anyway for who knows what reason.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
In your situation, I would go with Google. The Live web services are really new, and they will evolve over time, especially if they follow the same model as MS other mapping software.. free -> bundled -> unbundled/not free. Between Microsoft and Google, who do you trust for backwards compatibility in a year or two?
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.
I think your giant string-concatenating code makes baby Blaise Pascal cry.
More Twoson than Cupertino
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...
I've seen their report and I know what they do. However, I see good reason to trust Google (if they betray my trust, I'll dump them flat and they seem to know this; they've actually done meaningful things to increase privacy; they're honest and direct about what their actual policies are) and not so much reason to trust the other people listed. At least, no more than Google.
In the mean time, didn't Microsoft & Yahoo turn over dissidents to China? And didn't Google refuse the subpoena of user data from the US government when Microsoft & Yahoo gave it over without question?
I understand paranoia about your identity perfectly well. It just seems stupid to focus on the smaller threats when there are larger ones nearby, you know?
Actually, maybe I understand the paranoia better than you. I mean, you posted that while logged in...
Did you actually read that report? In my humble opinion, it was basically some guys opinion dressed up as a scientific study. There was no repeatable methodology and the author didn't even bother to fully fill out the matrix. Go read the comments on the story you linked to, if you want to get more detailed commentary.
Incidentally, I say this as a very biased person. I work for Google, on Google Maps. As per usual, what's written here is my own opinion and not that of my employers. I won't comment on the Google vs Microsoft debate - it's not my place to do so - but I'd like to say that I've seen first hand (and participated in) the very strict procedures we have in place to protect peoples privacy.
For instance, I'm one of the very few people who have Maps logs access (ie, I can see cookies and IP addresses), and that's only because I work directly with the servers on a day-to-day basis and do abuse handling as part of my job. The vast majority of Maps developers have no logs access at all. I have to periodically rejustify my access, I'm not allowed to track any individual cookie or IP address for longer than 24 hours, my own usage of the logs is recorded and audited, I'm not allowed to take the logs out of their secure holding area and am not allowed to give logs in non-scrubbed form to anybody else. Violating these rules is grounds for instant termination. Contrast this with ISPs which sell clickstream data on the open market.
I'm not trying to make any statement of policy or anything, because that's not my job, but if end-user privacy is going to be a deciding factor in which maps product to use, hopefully now you have more insight into how seriously we treat end user data (what I described applies to all Google products by the way).
I make a dash to the Slash to the D-O-T
Coz them news for nerds makes sense to me
So let this serve as a warning to the spammers and trolls
You may have a fat pipe but you ain't got bawls.
There's a new manifesto by ESR
And the stats of the watts of a hybrid car
I gots love for Perens and miguel, et al
And I voted CowboyNeal on the Slashdot Poll
I'm Microsoft bashin' like every single day
Coz the OS got holes and Exploder's teh gay
Now SCO's talkin' trash so I give firefox a ride
To reply as a Coward so I can hate on McBride
I will flame you with language I won't say to your face
And I bet you can't guess who gots all your base
There's one way to know if your server is rotting
Just post a link and you'll get a slashdotting
You can mod me down coz I'm a karma whore
And I'm a decorated veteran of a recent flame war
Where they fought about an app with a K or a G
And a heated debate on what was meant by "Free"
As a slashbot, when Linux receives a threat,
My palms begin to sweat and my evil bit is set
You best believe I'll be posting a rant
And I'll be surfin' Slashdot 'til my mom says I can't.
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.