On the Web : November 2006

If you enjoy reading 'On the Web', your ham radio club can publish this column on an exchange basis with SJRA. Contact Ted, , for the exchange details.		Our contributions to the South Jersey Radio Association club bulletin "Harmonics" includes lengthy Web addresses. As the URL's can be difficult or a nuisance to type into your Web browser, the postings here should make it easier to get to the Web sites SJRA members are interested in. Look for the posting at w2xq.com at the time "Harmonics" is scheduled for delivery in the south Jersey area. Questions, suggestions or contributions are always welcome.
		Solar X-rays  Geomagnetic Field  N 3 K L

Google Earth and Microsoft Virtual Earth

Technology in mapping this planet Earth has exploded in recent years. Low-cost (relatively) handheld or vehicle-mounted GPS units listening to a constellation of orbiting satellites — once only available to the military — can virtually pinpoint any place in the world to an accuracy of 10 to 20 feet (3-6 meters). Satellite photographs are now readily available from a number of vendors. Broadband DSL and cable connections to the Internet make the relatively new products of Google Earth (GE) and Microsoft Virtual Earth (VE) feasible. These programs offer a "virtual fly by", 3D and satellite maps direct you to almost any spot on the globe. Both programs link to business and municipal services and more — an electronic version of the telephone book's yellow (usually) pages.

• Google Earth : earth.google.com
• Microsoft Virtual Earth : microsoft.com/virtualearth

In early October Ed, N2EAC, and I were having an on-the-air discussion about the GPS units. (Some of you may know that I have been using a GPS unit in my vehicle since 2000 or so to complement my outdoor photography excursions.) In the course of the conversation, Ed asked if I had seen Virtual Earth and its amazingly detailed, clear photos. I had not. I decided to have a look at Google Earth (GE) vs Virtual Earth (VE).

GE "flies" in closer to the target than VE. The Bird's Eye View in VE gives you very sharp images, but the pictures are broken into discrete objects that cannot be manipulated. For example, the medical/apartment building at 72nd & York in New York (the one that the light plane crashed into on 11 October) is off to the side of one of the six close-ups — and you cannot spin it around as in GE. In VE, there is an abrupt jump from the "fly by" to the Bird's Eye photos options.

I also looked in Vermont where my daughter lives (outside of Burlington). Between GE and VE, directions from my home to my daughter's differ. GE takes a couple of strange turns in Bordentown to get to the NJTP, but VE on time screws the pooch in Vermont picking out the long way around. VE on shortest distance was pretty good. The VT aerial shots on both systems were not as good a detail as the denser areas of NJ, but in late October GE's pictures for VT changed for the better. Pictures were updated by at three years, and the resolution is so good that I can see a wooden fencepost laying on the ground by the garage.

I also looked at my work location in the Trenton (NJ) suburbs. Aerial on GE is more up to date than VE, but the VE Bird's Eye is the most current. (The adjacent property with the school buses is the telling difference; empty to a variety of vehicles and trucks to all school buses. Driving directions are interesting. It appears that GE direction are basically shortest time, as GE closely matches VE shortest time. When driving north on US 206 from NJ 70, both VE and GE make a mistake in Bordentown, sending me to Farnsworth Ave to cut over to US 130, then go south on US 130 to get onto I-295. That's three sides of a box, whereas a simple left turn on a road that the directions ignore would suffice. VE shortest distance makes a mess of the directions in the vicinity of the work location. And, strangely VE sends me off US 206 into the center of Columbus and then back out onto US 206. Obviously one should stay on US 206 itself, going through the underpass and Main St in Columbus — but the computer sees a savings of about one-eighth of a mile.

I briefly looked at overseas sites. The first was the city of Hilversum, Holland, near where a friend lives. GE pictures are very much superior to VE. Then I looked up my friend's address (the street name is Stam, but I'm not going to identify it further) in an adjacent, smaller village and GE hopped over the Dutch countryside, producing an image of moderate detail as it was in VT before the October 2006 upgrade — sufficient to see cars on the streets. No problem here. VE put me into Asia — at Istanbul, Turkey! Urk! I tried entering the full postal address and postal code, but VE kept me in Istanbul. No good here. VE apparently assumed "stam" was in effect, "stan" and I couldn't figure out a way to get VE back to the European continent and the land of the dikes.

For the heck of it I went to Istanbul in GE. The smallest scale photo in VE had a 1 mile legend, about 6.5 miles total in width. GE's default, and sharper, picture was 0.7 miles across at an altitude of 600 feet.

The globe-trotting shortwave listener and amateur radio operator is not well served in VE.

Then I realized what was really bothering me in VE.

Aside from flexibility, GE tells you where the pointer is: latitude, longitude, elevation, and altitude of the "eye". VE does none of that. GE allows you to get to a location by entering latitude, longitude, in a variety of decimal and dd-mm-ss formats, but VE searches only on an address. The point "40 N, 75W" puts you onto a Cinnamisson (NJ) golf course (try this), but VE prompts for addresses, suggesting one in AR, one in AZ, and two in CA starting with "40 N", and shows a view of Siloam Springs, AR.

Imagine you're sending a MARS or amateur radio traffic message that includes a location. Which is easier to send, two numbers or an address? The amateur radio operator in a remote or strange location with a GPS can locate himself (herself) on a map using GE, but must know the correct address using VE. I'm thinking of hams uprooted to provide emergency services at various locations after Katrina.

Admittedly, I am not a Microsoft fan. But what do you think? It struck me that VE is typical Microsoft. There is a lot of stuff in the product, but the fit and finish is lacking.

In the end, I'll use both GE and VE to locate addresses and get directions and look at tourist locations. But, at least for me, GE is the link I keep on the Mac, Windows and Linux desktops to use on a daily basis.

(An aside. There is a television show called 'The Amazing Race' that has contestants traveling around the world, seeking clues to the next stop in the race. One week the contestants were in Mauritius, and GE gave us a close-up look-see of the locations that the contestants.)

And in searching for the original notes I had made in comparing these products, I found an interesting EarthSoftwareReview.com Web site that touts itself as "the ultimate guide to Earth mapping software reviews and resources". Perhaps a brash statement, but I found other reviews and comparisons of GE and VE that were interesting reads. Other perspectives, other opinions.

Add Google Earth Blog to your reading list too. It is all things Google Earth: news, features, tips, technology and applications. The pages are an interesting read, including links to Google Earth files that display within the Google Earth application itself. Recommended.

(And it is rather scary how some software works. Using Apple's 'Spotlight' built into OS X to search the internal and three external drives on my G4, the results screen listed both files on the drives and resources on the Internet.)

A new Windows operating system in 2007

This is an alert. Microsoft's multi-layered replacement for Windows XP is complete. Vista is shipping to computer manufacturers to be installed on systems that will be on the market in early 2007. The early press coverage is all over the map on pros and cons. If you use Windows and expect to upgrade, please do your own research. I'll have links to my readings and audio reports in the Web version of this column at w2xq.com (rather than take space for the print version of Harmonics).

It is clear that hardware requirements have significantly increased. Vista will have multiple versions from a low-cost basic, no-frills, upgrade to an expensive everything-but-the-kitchen-sink corporate edition. In late October, Leo Laporte expressed serious reservations (heard in his segment on the weekly program 'This Week in Amateur Radio') about the licensure and limitations of the lesser editions, and suggested that listeners seriously look at a Linux operating system. ZD columnists are writing at a furious pace; reader comments, in my opinion, are quite interesting too. Here is a selection of writings:

• Which Vista Is The Right Vista?
• Half of American Business PCs Can't Run Vista (added 2006-12-07)

The only consolation is that XP will probably have a long support life, as historically Microsoft has had a tough time convincing corporate America to give up Windows NT and Windows 2000. Support for NT and 2000 operating systems continue (in varying degrees) for now, but no doubt Microsoft will push to outsource and finally drop customer support here, and I expect grease to be added to the XP skids as well. Firms and individuals will slow or stop fixing "bugs", nor would I expect new features to be added to their NT, 2000 and XP software to keep pace with the added functions and capabilities within Vista-based software.

---
Newsfeed help - W2XQ - Keep up to date with breaking news, info as it happens!
Links open in a new browser window.
Revised 5 November 2006

Read the previous month's column or the next month's column.

This page's URL : http://w2xq.com/sjra/sjra_2006-11.html