GPS World

Category: Mapping

  • A Free GIS Tool Just Got Better

    A few months ago, I wrote a little about ArcGIS Explorer (AE), a free GIS viewer from Esri. It’s a nice tool for non-GIS users who want to view GIS data. Looks like another feature is creeping into AE to make it a bit more powerful. Bern Szukalski, product strategist and evangelist at Esri, blogged earlier this week about new functionality in AE that will allow direct GPS support. In other words, you can connect a GPS receiver (Bluetooth or otherwise) to a device running AE and be able to visualize and record GPS data as its tracking.

    Borrowing from Bern’s Blog, following is a 2D map as he was driving, showing the waypoints and tracks as he was moving. He said he set AE to collect a GPS point every 10 seconds, centering the map as he moved. GPS waypoints and tracks are stored as notes.

    (Click to enlarge.)

     

    The next screen shot shows his path in 3D. Green represents GPS points/paths collected by mouse click. Yellow represents GPS points/paths collected at 10-second intervals.


    (Click to enlarge.)

     

    Bern blogged that he was using a borrowed $18 USB GPS receiver in this example. Don’t pay much attention to the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of the GPS positioning. He could have just as easily connected a sub-meter or centimeter-level GPS receiver (outputing NMEA 0183 messages) and had enough precision to accurately position the center of a 6-inch water meter cover plate on the sidewalk. That’s where this is headed, folks.

    A Quick Note on the Annual GITA Conference

    I didn’t attend the annual GITA (Geospatial Infrastructure Technology Association) conference this year, but I received several reports that this was the last GITA annual conference. That’s pretty sobering (but not surprising), given that it was the 34th such conference that started in the late 1970s. I blogged last year that I thought this years was going to be a really tough one because it wasn’t co-locating with another conference as it was last year with ACSM (American Congress on Surveying and Mapping). Although the demise of the GITA annual conference was predictable, it’s still sad to see it go. Last year, I thought the technical presentations were quite good and clearly demonstrated a need for continuing promoting and developing geospatial apps in the world of infrastructure. Without the GITA conference, I wonder where these folks will go to share their knowledge and experiences. I’d like to reiterate that there are too many niche conferences related to GIS. GIS folks can’t afford the time or expense, and neither can GIS sponsors/vendors, to attend three different small GIS conferences in a 90-day window. What I wrote a year ago is just as relevant today.

    Let’s discuss conferences for a minute

    As good as the content was for both the GITA and ACSM conferences, the attendance was horrible. If there were 1,000 people there (for both), I’d be surprised. At this pace of decline, something’s got to give. I attended the annual GITA conference in Seattle in 2008. If I recall correctly, there were about 1,400 attendees. This year, in 2010, there were maybe half of that including exhibitors. Next year, the GITA conference is operating as a stand-alone conference in a suburb of Dallas, Texas. I predict it might be even worse than this year. The ACSM annual conference is not doing any better, but rumor has it will co-locate in 2011. The two conferences won’t be co-located next year. It’s a time for conferences to start working together.
    Size Matters

    It’s a vicious cycle. The fewer attendees there are, the less interested vendors are in exhibiting and sponsoring the event. Each year, attendance erodes until it doesn’t make sense any longer. Now is the time for conference consolidation, especially in the GIS industry. GIS is tough to segment because it stretches across so many industry boundaries. In April alone, there was the GIS-T (GIS in Transportation) conference in West Virginia, the GITA/ACSM co-located conference in Phoenix and the ASPRS (American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing) conference in San Diego. All of these are small conferences that are becoming increasingly difficult to justify, financially, for both the operators and the attendees. I can safely say that attendees and vendors certainly would prefer to attend one conference in one location that includes GIS-T, GITA and ASPRS rather than three separate conferences spread out all over the US. They need to consolidate at the same time in a single location.

     

    I suppose the demise of the annual GITA conference is part of the consolidation I wrote about. Being accelerated by the current economy, people will just stop attending some conferences and pick/choose the conference(s) they feel fit their needs the best.

     

    Upcoming Events/Publications:

    Following are a few upcoming events you might be interested in:

    Webinar: April 21st. “LightSquared and GPS: Our Story So Far”. I’ll be participating in a moderated discussion about this issue. If your organization relies on GPS, I strongly encourage you to register. If you aren’t available during that time, register anyway and you’ll be provided a link to view the webinar at a time that’s convenient to you.

    Space Weather Workshop: April 26-29. I’ll be presenting at this conference and blogging about what I hear in order to keep you informed about space weather as the next solar cycle warms up.

    Western Forester: April issue. Look for my article and accompanying articles on Lidar, laser rangefinders, GPS and other emerging technologies that concern the forester and other natural resource professionals.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • New Technology in Forestry: Are You Ready?

    In the early 1990s, I recall being tasked with training a group of foresters on how to use a new-fangled handheld data collector the company I worked for had developed, along with various pieces of software on it for traversing, timber cruising, vegetation surveys, profiling, etc. Being fairly young and somewhat inexperienced, I didn’t fully understand the challenge of trying to convince a group of seasoned foresters to put away their pencils and “Rite in the Rain” tally cards and pick up an electronic gizmo in which they punched in their cruise plot info, traverse bearings, and various other pieces of field data. Of course, being involved in the development of the new-fangled handheld data collector, I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. Who could deny the value of error-checking to check for typos, graphic plot of traverses, and no transcribing back in the office?

    It’s too bad none (of mostly none) of the foresters in the room felt the same way.

    “I see how it will help the office people, but what’s in it for me?” questioned one.

    “It takes longer for me to punch it in the data collector than it does to write it down,” argued another.

    Upon sensing the building resentment, the HFIC (Head Forester In Charge) stood up in front of the room full of 40 or so foresters and said, “Well, folks, this is the direction we are going, so you need to get with the program.”

    Eventually, most of them adopted the new technology and some even embraced it. But some of the more technologically-resistant folks would go as far as using “Rite in the Rain” paper to record data in the woods only to return to their truck and enter it into the data collector. However, I believe after a period of time they became quite adept at data entry in their truck, so much so that the data collector eventually made its way into the woods with them.

    That was 20 years ago. The 80386 was the mainstream computer CPU, e-mail was still a novelty, websites were few and far between, and a mobile phone was about the size of lunch box.

    DuraRite “Rite in the Rain” Pocket Notebook

    Since that time, it seems like the forester has been bombarded with one mind-bending technology after another.

    Sorry to break the news to you, but technology is not settling down anytime soon. Following is a taste of where I think some of the technology is heading. In this issue, you’ll also read from my colleagues their take on the various technologies they work with on a regular basis.
    GPS

    Of course, GPS is close to my heart as I have written for GPS World magazine for many years and have been involved with GPS for more than 20 years. My first 10 years in GPS were spent developing GPS mapping products while the past 10 years have been spent as a power user of all sizes and shapes of GPS receivers, from ultra-miniature receivers giving mediocre accuracy to some of the highest -precision receivers ever made.

    Since GPS has been around a long time, you may think that is has reached a level of technological maturity. In some respects, you would be right. It’s been used by foresters since the late 1980s, albeit it has evolved significantly since then.

    In the early 1990s, GPS mapping receivers used for forestry were backpack configurations with handheld data recorders. WAAS didn’t exist, DGPS/beacons didn’t exist, Bluetooth didn’t exist, RTK Networks didn’t exist, and Selective Availability (SA) was active. SA meant that GPS autonomous accuracy (without any sort of correction) was about 100 meters. To improve accuracy, users had to post-process their GPS data using GPS base-station data. Public GPS base stations were virtually non-existent, and the Internet access was not commonplace, so most folks had to install, manage, and maintain their own GPS base stations.

    In May 2000, one of the most significant events in GPS history took place. The U.S. Government turned off SA. Overnight, the autonomous accuracy of GPS receivers increased ten-fold. It was never turned on again, and years later it was announced the feature wouldn’t be designed into future GPS satellites. It is gone forever.

    Since then, GPS availability and accuracy has increased due to a number of GPS system advancements as well as GPS receiver advancements. The price of GPS receivers have also dropped significantly. In 1990, a GPS receiver designed for 2-5 meter accurate mapping was priced at more than $10,000. Today, a sub-meter accurate GPS receiver can be purchased for under $2,000. That trend is going to continue. In fact, GPS is going to change a lot more in the next 10 years than it has in the last 10 years.

    Last year, the U.S. government launched a new generation satellite (model IIF) that adds another signal for civilians called L5. Once enough satellites are in orbit broadcasting L5 (as soon as 2015), you’ll likely see very inexpensive, high-accuracy GPS receivers.

    The beauty of the L5 signal is that it’s supported by other GPS-like systems such as Europe’s Galileo. The European Union is scheduled to launch its first two operational satellites this summer with the second pair scheduled for launch in early 2012. The first 18 Galileo satellites are projected to be in orbit by 2015. Since Galileo satellites use the same L1 and L5 frequencies as GPS satellites, a receiver designed for GPS is easily designed for Galileo, too. One advantage of a GPS/Galileo receiver is that you’ll have more satellites in view, and for foresters working under tree canopy or on steep terrain, this will make mapping a lot easier and quicker. For example, today you might have 6-7 GPS satellites in view while you’re in the woods. With future GPS and Galileo satellites, you might have 12 or 13 satellites in view.

    GPS receivers are becoming cheaper, better, and faster. Similar to personal computers, GPS receivers have declined in price and will continue to decline in price. Don’t be surprised if you see high-precision GPS receivers for mapping being sold for $100-200 in the future. WAAS is going to support L5, too. Today, the best accuracy you can get from WAAS is around two feet. Once WAAS supports L5 (around 2020), it will be able to provide accuracy of around four inches to inexpensive L1/L5 dual-frequency receivers.

    The Russian satellite system (GLONASS) has brought a lot to the table for surveyors and engineers in the past 10 years. In 2000, it seemed the GLONASS program was dead in the water and heading for extinction. The Russian Federation has done a fantastic job of revitalizing GLONASS to the point that GLONASS has become a standard feature on high-accuracy GNSS receivers across the surveying and engineering industries. The value of GLONASS is not accuracy, but rather availability. If you’re in the woods and having trouble tracking enough GPS satellites, GLONASS can add another 5-6 satellite signals, which can be the difference between getting a shot or not in dense tree canopy.

    While GLONASS used to be a feature only offered in high-accuracy surveying receivers due to its complex design, you will start to see mid-range GPS mapping receivers utilizing GLONASS. It’s also likely you’ll see consumer GPS receivers offering GLONASS as well because in the past couple of months, two of the GPS chipset companies introduced GPS/GLONASS chips for the consumer market.

    Bottom line: GPS receivers are going to get significantly more accurate, cheaper, and work in more places than they do today.
    Satellite Imagery

    At the Esri conference la
    st summer, Lawrie Jordan, Esri’s director of Imagery Solutions and founder of ERDAS, said this is the most exciting time to be involved in imagery in his 40-year career.

    Commercial satellite imagery quality and availability is the best it’s ever been. It wasn’t that long ago that five-year-old, three-meter-pixel resolution, black/white satellite imagery was the norm. Today, GeoEye, DigitalGlobe, RapidEye, and Spot Image are delivering an amazing amount of digital imagery at even more amazing resolutions on a regular basis. Jordan predicts that in less than five years, every square inch of the Earth will be imaged (by satellites) constantly. He said we are already half-way there.

    There is no better technology than satellite imagery for capturing the devastating impact of large-scale natural disasters such as the March 11, 2011, earthquake/tsunami in Japan.

    The following image (half-meter resolution) of Miniami Sanriku Cho, Japan, was captured by the GeoEye-1 satellite on November 15, 2009, prior to the earthquake/tsunami.

    Courtesy: GeoEye

    The next image (one-meter resolution) was taken on March 12, 2011, a day after the fifth strongest earthquake in recorded history struck off the coast of Japan, creating a massive tsunami that caused devastating flooding and resulted in extensive infrastructure damage and loss of life.

    Courtesy: GeoEye

    The following one-meter resolution image was shot by GeoEye’s IKONOS satellite on March 23, 2011. According to GeoEye, this is the Indian Gulch fire burning near Golden, Colorado. As of March 24, the fire had consumed 1,500 acres and was 25 percent contained. GeoEye says this type of imagery may be used to assess and measure damage to forest and other types of land cover — especially when compared to a false-color image of the same area.

    Courtesy: GeoEye

    Bottom line: Commercial satellite imagery is becoming more readily available and at higher resolutions than ever before. Look for that trend to continue.

     

    Lidar

    Lidar (Light Detection and Ranging) is a remote sensing technology that is sometimes referred to as 3D scanning. Traditionally, LiDAR is thought of as an airborne technology with a scanner mounted in an aircraft that can map huge swaths of ground, collecting elevation data in order to create a digital elevation model (DEM) for topographic surveys and other types of analysis. While collecting the data is relatively quick (albeit expensive), a huge amount of data is collected and must be processed.

    According to the US Geological Survey (USGS), two problems have hindered Lidar for scientific applications beyond creating bare-earth DEMs.

    1. The high cost of collecting Lidar data.
    2. The steep learning curve on research and understanding how to use the entire point cloud.

    While airborne Lidar has been around for quite some time, terrestrial (land-based) Lidar has made a strong push in recent years, and has even made its appearance on mainstream television (Crime Scene Investigation – CSI on CBS, 2005). Working on the same concept of 3D scanning, terrestrial Lidar is not used from thousands of feet in the air looking down, but rather on a tripod scanning a room, or scanning a bridge from 200 feet in the distance.

    Courtesy: Wikipedia

    Personally, I coordinated a 3D scanning project many years to create a 3D model of a wrecked SAAB 9000 as part of an accident reconstruction project. The process of scanning was very quick. It was completed within a couple of hours. The process of creating a deliverable (this was circa. 2003), however, was another story. It was a very labor-intensive project that took weeks. Today, software to create a deliverable from these big “point cloud” files has improved dramatically and more increasingly, third party software developers are creating software tools that assist users in working with these data sets.

     

    Terrestrial 3D scanners first started making their appearance in the land surveying and civil engineering professions. 3D scanners are an efficient way to create complex as-built maps such as in refineries.

    Courtesy: Wikipedia

    They still have somewhat of a steep price tag today, but they were especially expensive when they were first introduced, well over $100,000 at that time.

    But terrestrial 3D scanning is hitting its stride and finding its way into other industries besides surveying and engineering. Yes, even forestry. Albeit in its early stages of development, 3D scanners are being hauled into the woods.

    Take a look at the following illustration courtesy of TreeMetrics of Ireland.

    Courtesy: TreeMetrics Ltd

    According to TreeMetrics, millions of points are collected with each 30 meter scan. After downloading the scan data, software filters irrelevant data and creates a 3D profile of each tree. The DBH, height, taper, straightness and volume are calculated for each tree. Trees that weren’t scanned due to heavy branches or other obstructions are modeled. Stem data files are then produced from which simulation models can be developed that will be used to estimate the product value before a tree is harvested. If harvesting is not done at that time, data is recorded and can be compared to future scans to monitor growth and health.

    Bottom line: 3D scanning, especially terrestrial 3D scanning, is a technology you’ll see in the not-so-distant future, maybe even in the woods. Prices of 3D scanning equipment will continue to decline while software to handle the massive point clouds will continue to become more powerful.

    GPS, satellite imagery, and Lidar are only three of a number of advancing technologies that foresters will see working their way into their toolkit. Mobile phones are also advancing at a rapid pace, becoming significantly more powerful and performing many more tasks than just a phone. The more advanced mobile phones have a GPS chip built inside as well as street maps and aerial photos a la Google and Microsoft. If you look back at mobile phones 10 years ago and compare them to today’s phone, it’s hard to imagine where they will be 10 years from now. They could quite possibly be the central piece of office equipment for all your communications and document management.

     

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • GIS In Action 2011 Conference

    I spent a day at the GIS In Action 2011 in Portland, OR this week. While it was a relatively small conference (~200 attendees), the former Governor of Wyoming and current Esri Director of Policy & Public Sector Strategy, Jim Geringer, was the keynote speaker who had a interesting perspective.

    The most interesting part of Mr. Geringer’s keynote was not really about GIS, at least not technically. He posed the question “If you had 10 minutes at the top, what would you talk about?”

    It’s an interesting question. What if you had your 10 minutes at the top? What would you talk about? The “top” may be your state Governor or it could be your organization’s IT department chief, Budget Director, or anyone else with little knowledge about GIS but who makes policy and/or budget decisions that affect your department’s GIS.

    Mr. Geringer, undoubtedly one who was on the receiving end of many of these 10 minute lightning talks, emphasized that you’ve got to make your talk relevant to something that is on that person’s list of current topics. Following is a slide that Mr. Geringer displayed when talking about this subject.

     

     

    For example, if there’s a severe drought in your state, it might be in the Governor’s Top 10 list of concerns. In that case, you might emphasize the importance of GIS in analyzing the water resource problem and how it might help develop solutions. Another example might be criminal activity in your city. If you were to have 10 minutes with your City Mayor, you could explain how GIS could be (or is) used to analyze trends in criminal activity so that crime-fighting resources might be more efficiently allocated.

    I think the Governor’s point well-taken. It’s very easy (I’m guilty of it as much as anyone) to get caught up in our own world of technology and forget how to explain to people outside of our geospatial industry how important geography is in most challenges we face.

    Another interesting subject the former governor discussing were the top 10 issues facing state government, from his perspective.

     

     

    His point is well-made that all of these issues have a geographic element to them.

    To emphasize the #1 issue facing U.S. state governments, he presented the following slide.

     

    And, of course, a conversation about GIS trends would not be complete without a discussion about the explosion of mobile devices.

     

     

    Another presentation I attended at the conference was one from Jon Aschenbach who discussed a snowboarding half-pipe mapping project on Mount Hood in Oregon.

    The problem was that the operator didn’t know exactly where to position the half-pipe during the fall before the snow fell. If they didn’t position it correctly, they would have to move it mid-season, due to lack of snow, at a cost of $10,000+.

     

    The elevation difference from the top of the half-pipe to the bottom of the half-pipe is nearly 1,000 feet.

     

     

    The crew collected topographic data when the snow was largely melted to understand the best placement for the half-pipe. If they place the half-pipe optimally, they will avoid rocks emerging in the late spring as the snow begins to melt and enjoy a longer season and avoid having to move the half-pipe.

     

    During the winter, the crew took measurements to understand the depth of the snow at certain locations on the half-pipe.

     

     

    One of the challenges was finding a solid surface to locate the GPS base station and also to optimize the range of the spread-spectrum RTK radios.

     

     

    According to the presentation, Mount Hood receives an average of 550 inches of snowfall each year. It’s high elevation helps retain snow into the summer. It’s a world-class area for skiing and snowboarding. Olympic snow ski and snowboard teams train at Mount Hood during the summer.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • As Data Collection Technology Advances, So Does BIM

    My fellow geospatial editor, Art Kalinski, wrote about BIM (building information modeling) earlier this week in the GeoIntelligence Insider newsletter. I’ve touched on the subject before. All too often we think of GIS as it relates to outdoor infrastructure: street maps, utility systems, parcel maps, timber harvesting, land management, environmental management, etc.

    Last summer at the Esri Surveying and Engineering Summit, I attended a talk presented by Stuart Rich, chief technology officer of Penobscot Bay Media, LLC. He presented on understanding, documenting, and building systems to support spatial data infrastructure’s security requirements as well as initiatives to move GIS inside the building footprint.

    He said he was involved in using terrestrial LiDAR inside buildings to collect massive amounts of data. So much, in fact, that “the value of measurement is trending very close to zero” using very high-volume data collection at 250,000 points/second.

    Stuart’s Factoid: Only 16% of cities are mapped, with a big vacuum being building interior maps in urban areas.

    He also discussed the lack of attention to underground infrastructure mapping.

    Another example of BIM detail, as provided in Art’s article, is a building wall which, in most GIS, if it exists at all, is a single polyline, maybe two polylines in rare cases. Thinking in a GIS sort of way, a building wall ”could contain more than six layers of data: paint, drywall, framing, blocking, fire stops, insulation, etc.” Think about this for a minute. Imagine how the quality of decisions would improve if the building owner was considering renovating his building and had this sort of information and software tools available. The decisions about which walls to leave or take down and future layout, for instance, would likely change if this information was readily available.

    Honestly, for building design, and most kinds of design for that matter, CAD isn’t the right tool if you think about it. It doesn’t have the database or analysis tools behind the various points, lines, and polygons to make the best decisions. This is the foundation of the GeoDesign concept being promoted these days.

    Although I didn’t set out to write about GeoDesign, it’s very fitting. According to Wikipedia, “GeoDesign brings geographic analysis into the design process, where initial design sketches are instantly vetted for suitability against a myriad of database layers describing a variety of physical and social factors for the spatial extent of the project. This on-the-fly suitability analysis provides a framework for design, giving land-use planners, engineers, transportation planners, and others involved with design the tools to leverage geographic information within their design workflows.”

    Of course, as Stuart mentions and as I’ve written about before, a highly related topic is underground infrastructure (sewer, water, electric, gas, telecom). That’s a whole other subject and one that I’m close to as I spend quite a bit of time working with landscape architects who deal with underground infrstructure on a daily basis in their projects. For them, as opposed to “what’s inside the wall,” a landscape architect has to ask “what’s under the ground.” If he or she doesn’t know until the construction crew starts tearing down and digging, then the project risk increases substantially.

    A good example and story I read this week was a short interview that Directions magazine published about the San Bruno gas pipeline explosion which killed nine people. You can read the interview here. Essentially, it’s a lesson in spatial data management with respect to underground infrastructure, with spatial data accuracy being the primary theme.

    Data, Data, Data

    In the world of real estate, it is said the three most important features of real-estate property are location, location, and location. I think you can say that the three most important feature of a GIS are data, data, and data. It’s not the software tools we are lacking, it’s the data. That’s why revenue from GIS data over the past eight years has grown at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ~15 percent, while GIS software has grown considerably less, according to research firm Daratech, Inc.

    Where Is the Data Coming From?

    Data collection technology is changing rapidly. Look at two key sources of geospatial data: remote sensing and GPS. Remote sensining, in particular, is well-suited for building interior data collection.

    At the same Esri Surveying and Engineering conference I mentioned above, Lawrie Jordan, director of Imagery at Esri, said that this is the most exciting time to be involved in imagery during his 40-year career.

    Commercial satellite imagery quality and availability is the best it’s ever been. It wasn’t that long ago that three-year-old, one-meter-pixel resolution, black/white imagery was the norm. Today, GeoEye, DigitalGlobe, RapidEye, and Spot Image are delivering an amazing amount of digital imagery at even more amazing resolutions. Jordan stated that in less than five years, every square inch of the Earth will be imaged (by satellites) constantly. He said we are already half-way there.

    Another form of remote sensing that’s busting at the seams is 3D scanning (terrestrial LiDAR). We’ve seen a lot of development in 3D scanning over the past 10 years. The equipment used to be pretty expensive, but the prices are coming down as the technology gains acceptance. I recall using the technology a number of years ago (circa 2003). I was tasked with an accident reconstruction project. Part of the task was to create a 3D model of a wrecked automobile. Traditionally, one would use a surveying total station and measure shot-by-shot at key points on the automobile. Even measuring 1,000 points on the automobile wouldn’t result in enough data points to create a reasonable 3D model. We decided to use a 3D scanner. We were able to scan the automobile in under two hours and collect a tremendous amount of detailed data.

    The good news is that we had a tremendous amount of detailed data to work with. The bad news was the same, we had a tremendous amount of detailed data to work with. I think it took us four weeks to produce a deliverable from the data. However, keep in mind that this was nearly eight years ago and software tools have come a long way since then (Safe Software, Leica Geosystems, Trimble, Topcon, all have software tools for dealing with 3D scan data), so the process in producing a deliverable today is more efficient.

    I’ve written and said this many times over: geospatial data fuels the GIS software engine. Esri and other GIS software developers are making very powerful GIS engines. In fact, the GIS software engines far exceed the quality of the geoespatial data we have to work with. BIM is a great example of that. There’s a substantial lack of BIM data, but with 3D scanning and other geospatial data collection technology advancing rapidly today
    , that will change. GIS will move indoors.

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Three Big Ones in Five: Geospatial-style

    Three Cool Things in Geospatial

    Corning Glass

     

    After watching this video (5:33 in length), you may feel like buying stock in Corning Glass!

     

    How important are graphic displays to the geospatial professional? I’d say vital. I’m not sure about all the consumer glass stuff they show in the video, but it does show where glass technology is heading. I was at a municipal transportation advisory meeting last night and I can imagine a dual-purpose whiteboard/mointor in a city planner’s conference room where one could display the City GIS for detailed discussions instead of the dated, static maps taped up on the wall. The only question is cost. Given the cost reduction of large, high-resolution monitors in the past two years, Corning’s vision, at least for geospatial apps, may not be that far off.

     

    Augmented Reality

    Hmmm…do you see a trend here? Tablet computers, glass displays, augmented reality software.

    It’s pretty clear where things are heading. You can already see this on mobile phones today.

    A couple of weeks ago, I mentioned that I bought a Samsung Galaxy S (Epic 4G) phone. It’s screen is large enough (4″ display) that you can use it like a tablet computer. The touch screen display is such that I use it like you saw in the Corning video using Swype or similar technology.

    This week, Juniper Research concluded from their research that Augmented Reality will be a $1.5 billion business by 2015. They cited the availability of software development tools, device manufacturers decision to pre-load augmented reality apps on mobile devices, and trends in mobile device advertising as key drivers of augmented reality.

    I have not found a better one-minute video than the one below that exemplifies the beauty of augmented reality. It’s truly an example of technology integration as GPS and digital compass data are used to correctly position the mobile device.

     

    iPad 2

    Although it hasn’t panned out to be the geospatial tool it could have been, the iPad has given the tablet industry some mojo. It’s pure speculation on my part, but I think it’s safe to say that more tablets have been introduced in the past year than in the previous five years, thanks to the iPad.

    What does the the iPad 2 offer?

    33% thinner, 15% or so lighter, faster processor, front and rear cameras. Nice features, but it’s more of an update than an upgrade. Still no support for Bluetooth SPP (Serial Port Profile), so you still can’t interface it to external GPS receivers.

    iPad 2

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Quick & Dirty: Importing Coordinates into a Simple (and Free) Mapping Program

    It’s easy to jump ahead and talk about the exciting things happening today and on the horizon in the geospatial industry. Rich 3D visualizations, complex databases, sophisticated analysis, high-tech data collection equipment, etc. But what about the thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of people who could benefit from just being able to take the first step of importing basic information and coordinates into a mapping program.

    Last week, a reader sent me a small dataset of simple lat/lon coordinates in Excel and asked me the best way to import them into some sort of mapping software. My first inclination was to use ArcGIS.com or Google Earth, or something online to avoid having to download, install and maintain software on local computers. But alas, that was not to be. After a quick post to the ArcGIS Resource Center Forum, I quickly found out that ArcGIS.com was not going to work.

    “Nelson” responded to my post with the following:

     

    Hey Eric,
    Unfortunately, there is no direct way to add layers, csv files, etc., to ArcGIS.com; however, Esri has noted on a couple of occasions that they are exploring the possibility of this functionality.

     

    Hmmm….I briefly considered Google Earth, but my experience has not been great with Earth or Earth Pro. It’s ok, but still a little cheesy for my tasted.

    When I suggested that my back-up plan was to investigate ArcGIS Explorer, Nelson responded:

     

     

    ArcExplorer is definately the route you should take.

    There are a number of advantages to it:

    1) The points can be imported very easily using the GUI.

    2) If they ever do decide to shift to a GIS, the layers in ArcExplorer can be shared using Layer Packages or KML files.

    3) The Google Earth interface is not as user friendly as ArcExplorer and you also have the ability to change to a number of Basemaps on the fly — ArcGIS Online (Imagery, Topographic, Streets) Bing and OpenStreetMap with 2D/3D rendering.

    Lastly, if you yourself are an ArcGIS user, it will probably make your life a little bit easier to work with a format that is well organized and familiar to you.

    Cheers,

    P.S. At the Federal User Conference, Esri announced there is going to be tons more functionality built in to ArcExplorer over the course of the year.

     

    At that point, I committed to trying ArcGIS Explorer. Please note that I’m the last person to open a manual for this kind of software. I really think it should be straight-forward enough to figure it out in a few minutes. The only reference I used was the online ArcGIS Explorer Desktop FAQ and I accessed the Help file once. Of course, I used the ArcGIS Explorer Forum, which is very good.

    Here is a screenshot of the data I had to work with. it was 62 records long, a subset of the actual dataset.

     

    I spent the most time making sure the coordinates were formatted correctly. The original spreadsheet had N/S/E/W to indicators instead of positive and negative. For example, instead of -17 04.201, it was formatted as 17 04.201s, with the “s” denoting south latitude. For your reference, north latitude is positive values, south latitude is negative, east longitude is positive, and west longitude is negative. This had to change. With only 62 records, I could do it by hand in a couple of minutes. If I had to change 600 or 6,000 records, I would have used a more automated method.

    The other item I needed to figure out were the attributes. None were provided in the spreadsheet, so I inserted a description number and a title for each point.

    Once the spreadsheet was formatted correctly, the rest was very quick and straight-forward. After installing ArcGIS Explorer, this is what you see when you run the program.

     

    If any of you had used ArcExplorer in years past like I did, this is totally different, and refreshing.

    I saved the Excel spreadsheet as a CSV file (Comma-delimited text file).

    To import into ArcGIS Explorer, simply select Add Content/Text Files.

     

    Once you select the CSV file, it reminds me of importing a CSV file into Excel in that you have to define what each spreadsheet column means, although ArcGIS Explorer does recognize some of the fields automatically. For example, if the top of a column is labeled lat, latitude, y, y-coord, y-coordinate, ArcGIS Explorer automatically assumes the data in the column contains latitude data. The same goes for the longitude and elevation fields. For a good description of importing text files, click here.

    First text import screen:

     

    Second text import screen:

     

    After clicking on Finish, the data is imported and displayed in ArcGIS Explorer.

     

    The background imagery is automatically displayed and there are a number of display and analysis options.

    To query a particular feature, simply click on it. A window is displayed as follows:

    The pop-up window could display a number of things such as hyperlinks, photos, videos, etc.

    Once your data is imported, other map data can be added to customize the final to your liking.

    Finally, there is a 3D view that I tried, but it didn’t work for me. I suspect it had to do with my laptop video card or video memory, but I would like to have seen it work. That would have been cool to see, especially if a rough terrain surface was visible.

    Alas, there is an online version of ArcGIS Explorer I didn’t try. There was some discussion about it at the 2011 Esri Federal User Conference (FedUC) a couple of weeks ago. Click here to see what’s coming in future updates of ArcGIS Explorer Online.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    <
    span style=”font-size: 11px; color: rgb(82, 82, 82); line-height: 16px; font-family: Arial;”>Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Where the 3D Scanning Action Is, and Keeping It Simple

    I’m preparing for some conference presentations I’ll be giving in a couple of weeks. One of the subjects I’m covering is spatial data transformation, or traditionally known as ETL (Extract/Transform/Load) tools. I’ve written many times before that in the geospatial industry, data is the fuel. We, as users, have access to some amazingly powerful GIS software tools.

    Clearly, the geospatial enabler is data. Without it, it’s like having a fishing pole without a pond; a tool without a purpose.

    If you look at emerging geospatial technologies, where’s the data coming from? Yes, crowd-sourcing, GPS/GNSS, and imagery are, and will continue to be, volume sources of geospatial data.

    From an infrastructure perspective (civil engineering), 3D laser scanning is a particularly interesting source of high-volume geospatial data. Ground-based and airborne 3D scanners create insanely huge volumes of data. Although an emerging technology, these scanners (LiDAR technology) have been around for many years.

    I recall using this technology on projects 8 or 9 years ago to scan accident scenes and infrastructure such as bridges. The scanning time was amazingly efficient. In some cases, the scanning data collection sessions were done in a couple of hours. During that period, literally millions of data points were collected. For the first time, the ratio between labor expended on data collection and labor expended on data processing was extremely skewed towards data processing, and that was the headache.

    While scanning time was very short, data processing time to produce a deliverable was brutal, literally taking weeks. Granted, that was 8 or 9 years ago. Advanced software tools have made data processing more efficient today, but dealing with huge volumes of data is still a challenge. Some people say that scanning may eventually replace traditional surveying equipment that shoot and record one coordinate at a time. A land surveyor, on a really strong day, may be able to shoot and record upwards of a 1,000 coordinates. With a scanner, that same person could shoot and record millions of points in a day.

    Data, Data, Data
    Ground-based and airborne LiDAR technology are clearly on the uprise. Last year, while most conferences were struggling to maintain the 2009 levels, even failing, the SPAR 2010 3D imaging conference was up 23%, according to their reports. The International LiDAR Mapping Forum conference also reported record attendance figures. Although the conferences are still in niche-mode (less than 1,000 attendees), the growth is steady.
    If you step back a bit and look at the big picture, the game is in data processing. Yes, equipment manufacturers will crank better and cheaper scanners, but turning those 3D point clouds into useful products is where the action is.
    You can see this with SAFE Software’s recently announced FME 2011 product. While historically focused on GIS and CAD interoperability, SAFE obviously sees the upside in the point cloud business as a major part of FME 2011 is focused on dealing with the massive amounts of data created from 3D laser scanning.
    Keeping it Simple
    Changing gears…
    With all this geospatial technology advancing faster than a rabbit on a motorcycle, it’s hard to slow down and look at the simple uses of GIS that still offer a lot of value. As much as most of us are pushing hard to implement more and more spatial data technology, it’s just as important that we introduce people to GIS, even a very simple version of it.
    This week, a reader asked me about the best way to display a map from a bunch of lat/lon coordinates (little or no attributes) in a spreadsheet. No complex attribute tables, no strange map projection, just a spreadsheet of lat/lon coordinates.
    This challenge gave me reason to revisit Esri’s freely available ArcExplorer software. It wasn’t my first choice, but it’s where I‘ll likely end up. I haven’t touched ArcExplorer (I know that’s not the name of the current software, read on) for quite some time (as in a couple of years or more). I use ArcGIS, AutoCAD and a half-dozen other spatial data software tools.
    When presented with the challenge, my first inclination was to push her towards arcgis.com in order to steer her away from having to download, install and maintain desktop software. No go. After a quick post to a support group, I’m told there’s not an easy way to add this data to an arcgis.com map. My other thought was Google Earth. Naah.
    I subscribed to Google Earth Pro for a year and it really is sort of cheesy, to me. Maybe it’s because my view is distorted from my experience with GIS software in the past, but it seems to me that Google Earth is still primarily eye-candy, and what I really wanted was an easy-to-use, light-weight GIS. However, I do hope that they continue pushing that technology forward.
    All along, I thinking my ultimate back-up plan would be to recommend ArcExplorer. I went to download it and remembered it’s now upgraded to ArcGIS Explorer. I remember reading and posting that news awhile back, but hadn’t taken the time to download and preview it. It’s a much different animal than ArcExplorer, and I like what I see so far. I haven’t tried to import any data yet, but from the menu selection, I can see it will accept the simple ones such as shapefiles, raster imagery, ASCII, and GPS exchange files. Most simple data sets can be converted to one of these formats using freely available software tools.
    ArcGIS Explorer Opening Screen
    This will be an interesting experiment, and one I will update you on, likely next week, as I try it with a sample data set from the reader.
    I really like the opportunity to introduce someone to GIS, even at just a simple level because I believe will open their eyes to other possibilities in the future. It empowers them to think more GIS-centric.

    Thanks, and see you next time.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Remember How Slow Dial-up Was? That’s Where GPS Is Today

    It’s not often that I share content between the two newsletters I write (Geospatial Weekly and Survey Scene), but this week is one of them. Europe’s version of GPS (named Galileo) will have a profound effect on the geospatial industry in the future. In the past, I’ve written about how cheap accurate positioning is going to get. Europe’s Galileo is a big step in that direction and an important factor in making it happen faster than GPS alone.

    Being able to collect accurate geospatial data, whether it’s a utility pole, a wetland monitoring well, or a catch basin, will be infinitely easier, cheaper, more efficient and more accurate than it is today. Therefore, with accurate data becoming much more available and accessible, what do you think will happen to geospatial applications?

    To answer that question, I’ll use an analogy that we can all relate to.

    Remember in the early ’90s when the average person accessed the Internet via a dial-up connection? You were lucky to get a connection speed of 56 kbps, and more likely it was 28.8 kbps or 14.4 kbps. At that speed, there is only a limited amount of activity one could do on the web. Geospatial professionals and geospatial users are particularly heavy users of Internet bandwidth. GIS vector data, imagery, and maps in general create sizable files. Can you imagine the typical geospatial professional trying to accomplish their daily tasks using a 56 kbps dial-up connection to the Internet?

    Think about how much economic benefit the world has gained with the introduction and proliferation of broadband (cable, DSL, high-speed wireless, etc.) Internet connectivity. Not only are we more efficient with broadband connectivity, we are more enabled. Take one example, cloud computing. That emerging technology is totally reliant on broadband Internet connectivity. If only dial-up existed, cloud computing wouldn’t exist.

    To put GPS/GNSS (Galileo, GLONASS, etc.) in perspective, we are still in the “dial-up” phase. Even though GPS/GNSS is a multi-billion worldwide industry today, imagine what it will be when it enters into the “broadband” phase. Try to imagine the tremendous number of applications that will be enabled when GPS/GNSS is orders of magnitude less expensive and more accurate than it is today. Then, think about how much of the GPS/GNSS industry has a geospatial component to it.

    The following is lifted from my Survey Scene newsletter we published this week. It describes the path to cheap accuracy and how Galileo will help us get there faster.

     

    2011: The Year for Galileo

    January 18, 2011

    By Eric Gakstatter

    Back in December 2006, I wrote about the momentum of Galileo (Europe’s planned satellite navigation system) in an article discussing GNSS trends. Galileo been discussed off and on for well over a decade and was a hot topic for a number of years. In fact, back around 2001, the U.S. really didn’t want the European Union to embark on the project. While there was not a clear policy against Galileo, certainly the sentiment was questioning the creation of another satellite navigation system when GPS already exists that’s free for everyone to use. Ok, it probably wasn’t that simple, but you get my point. No bueno from the U.S. at that time.

    The following is an EU slide that illustrates why the EU wants to develop its own satellite navigation system similar to GPS:

     

    Source: European Commission – Montpellier, France – October 2010

    Then, in 2004, the U.S. government abruptly changed its tune. It really doesn’t matter why and I’m not sure I’d believe the answer if I was given one, but President George HW Bush instituted a new policy that encouraged international cooperation. The U.S. SPACE-BASED POSITIONING, NAVIGATION, AND TIMING POLICY issued in 2004 stated, among other things, that the United States shall:

    “Seek to ensure that foreign space-based positioning, navigation, and timing systems are interoperable with the civil services of the Global Positioning System and its augmentations in order to benefit civil, commercial, and scientific users worldwide. At a minimum, seek to ensure that foreign systems are compatible with the Global Positioning System and its augmentations and address mutual security concerns with foreign providers to prevent hostile use of space-based positioning, navigation, and timing services;”

    Also in 2004, the U.S. and European Union signed the landmark GPS-Galileo Agreement that established a basis of cooperation. This was great news for the GNSS user community. More satellites and more signals usually equates to better performance.

    The next policy update after 2004 was last year (2010) and it was simply titled “NATIONAL SPACE POLICY“. The sentiment regarding international cooperation was the same, if not leaning more towards cooperation:

    “Engage with foreign GNSS providers to encourage compatibility and interoperability, promote transparency in civil service provision, and enable market access for U.S. industry;”

    After the 2004 GPS-Galileo policy was published, the question from the civil user community was, “When are we going to have satellites in orbit broadcasting signals we can use?”

    The answer to that question wasn’t easy, and took longer to answer than anyone predicted, including myself.

    Now, we have the answer.

    Unlike GPS and GLONASS, Galileo is a civilian
    project, not a military-funded one. I’m not saying GPS and GLONASS were easy to fund, but the core application was defined (military use), and the funding required to develop and maintain GPS and GLONASS is drawn from the military budget. Furthermore, the European Union is comprised of 27 member countries. The political dynamics are, obviously, very complex.

    The Galileo funding modeling initially was to be a public-private partnership (PPP). Part of it would be funded with public money and part of it would be funded by a consortium of companies. But, that wasn’t so easy. How much funding would each contribute? What’s the return on investment? How would it generate revenue? Would there be a tax receiver sales? Would there be a user charge?

    We’re not talking about small sum of money. We’re talking about several billion Euros just to get it off the ground.Think about it, how much money has the U.S. military spent to develop GPS? $30-$35 billion for development, deployment and long-term maintenance. Granted, Galileo will cost a lot less than that, but it’s still a healthy sum that no company would be willing to gamble without a solid return-on-investment (ROI) argument.

    Eventually, the PPP (Private-Public Partnership) funding model was abandoned and in late 2007, and as described in a January 2008 GPS World article:

    “European officials responsible for the EU budget said they had found funds for Galileo, proposing to draw unused money originally earmarked for natural resources programs this year and next. The move would provide some €2.4 billion ($3.3 billion) for Galileo — the budgetary shortfall left with the dissolution of the public/private partnerships — over the course of the next six years. The following month, European parliamentarians agreed with the plan, but felt it didn’t go far enough. They boosted proposed funding for Galileo, increasing the money set aside for the program in 2008 to €739 million ($1.06 billion), up from the much more modest €151 million under the transport officials’ original proposal for next year.

    Not all were sold on public funding for Galileo. But in November, European officials said they had ironed out their differences. At the 11th hour came heated debate about how Galileo funding and contracts would be awarded among member states and their respective aerospace companies. Eventually, a final accord was reached. Europe anticipates spending €3.7 billion on Galileo through 2013.”

    (Updated figures: €2.1 billion for IOV and €3.4 billion for FOC)

    That was three years ago. The EU folks have been working hard since then, but talk is cheap and people stopped talking about Galileo with the exception of a few information spikes here and there. There was nothing else to say until now.

     

    2011 is the Year for Galileo

    Galileo will likely meet a major milestone this summer, launching their first two satellites for in-orbit validation. But unlike the two Galileo test satellites already in orbit (GIOVE-A and GIOVE-B), these satellites will be part of the planned 30-satellite operating constellation.

    For you Galileo naysayers, the EU is past the point of no return. Eighteen satellites are contracted. There is no reversing the process. And, if I were to place a bet, it’s very unlikely to stall at 18. That would be sort of like building a structure, but not finishing the interior.

    Although I haven’t seen a detailed launch schedule or control segment plan, the latest Galileo public document I’ve read (European Commission – Montpellier, October 2010) presents the following timeline:

    2011/2012 – In-Orbit validation: Four IOV satellites and ground segment (based on European Commission presentation from October 2010).

    2014/2015 – Initial Operating Capability for early services — 18 satellites (based on European Commission presentation from October 2010).

    2019/2020 – Full Operating Capability — 30 satellites (based on mid-term review released January 18, 2011)

     

    2014 Will Be the Year of Cheap GNSS Accuracy

    I believe the magic year for GNSS will be 2014. That’s when GNSS receivers are going to be very interesting.

    Why?

    It’s no secret that I think the new L5 signal is a game-changer. Last summer I wrote an article titled “What’s Going to Happen When High-Accuracy GPS is Cheap?”  It’s all about L5.

    L1/L5 dual-frequency receivers are going to be cheap, and accurate. Today, dual-frequency (L1/L2) receivers are thousands of dollars. L1/L5 receivers will be a fraction of that cost because open signal specifications will lead to increased competition.

    As I mentioned in the article last summer, the GPS Directorate is planned to have 24 satellites broadcasting L5 by 2019. The beauty of Galileo is that it can cut that time in half and make it happen by 2014, only three years from now. Here’s how.

    Since Galileo supports L1 and L5 similar to GPS, you only need 12 x GPS satellites broadcasting L5 and 12 x Galileo satellites broadcasting L5 to have something close to 24 satellites broadcasting L5.

    The BIG question is if the U.S. and EU will coordinate orbit slots so the 12 x GPS and 12 x Galileo satellites are in a somewhat optimal 24-slot constellation instead of an uncoordinated configuration. The civil economic benefit from taking advantage of L5 as soon as possible would be substantial. Just this week, the EU issued a reportstating that 6-7% of the GDP of EU countries is dependent on satellite navigation. Better accuracy enabled by L1/L5 will spur a mind-boggling number of new applications that will further broaden the GNSS user base and economic impact. It would also stimulate GNSS receiver development from a much broader range of GNSS receiver designers than we see today.

    With a combined GPS/Galileo constellation, not only will accuracy become cheaper, but availability will increase significantly. The new GPS 24+ 3 configuration is certainly a big help for high precision users with respect to availability. Can you imagine how much precise positioning availability will improve when 18 Galileo satellites (not to mention 30) are added to the mix? Last summer, the EU-U.S. Cooperation on Satellite Navigation Working Group C published a report entitled “Combined Performance for Open GPS/Galileo Receivers.” The report succinctly draws the following conclusion, with which I wholeheartedly agree:

    “The studies demonstrate and quantify the improvements that can be expected when using GPS and Galileo open services in combination under different environmental conditions. In all studied cases, the combination of GPS and Galileo led to noteworthy performance improvements as compared to single system performance. The most significant improvement is for partially obscured environments, where buildings, trees or terrain block portions of the sky. The increased number of satellites available provides robust performance even as some signals are blocked, which is reflected in a significant increase of positioning accuracy and availability.”

    Following are some data from the report that back up the conclusions on availability.

    Availability with a 15° elevation mask

    GPS only – 99.10%

    Galileo only – 100%

    GPS/Galileo – 100%

    Availability with a 30° degree elevation mask

    GPS only – 57.28%

    Galileo only – 75.02%

    GPS/Galileo – 98.93%

    Granted, you should take these numbers with a grain of salt. These are based on positioning with four satellites in view. The reality is that for high precision users, we need data from at least six satellites for robust positioning. But, I think the scale of improvement when going to GPS/Galileo constellation is obvious and will scale similarly when considering six satellite positioning.

    For all the reasons above, I’m putting my stamp on 2011 as being The Year of Galileo. Look forward to further coverage on Galileo in the coming months.

    ———————————————–

    Upcoming Jan. 26 Webinar: SBAS, DGPS or Post-processing? Which Should You Use?

    Speakers:

    Eric Gakstatter, Editor, Geospatial Solutions and Survey Scene newsletter &

    Dr. Mike Whitehead, VP of Technology at Hemisphere GPS

    Event Date: 01/26/2011 10:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, 5 PM GMT

    Tens of thousands of users around the world utilize GPS/GNSS receivers for mapping, surveying and navigating. Since autonomous GPS/GNSS typically does not provide the needed accuracy, users must rely on a source of GPS/GNSS corrections. There are three sources of GPS/GNSS corrections available to users who desire reliable GPS/GNSS accuracy in the sub-meter to three meter range: SBAS, DGPS and post-processing. Dr. Michael Whitehead, Chief Scientist at Hemisphere GPS, will join me in presenting a background on the three technologies as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each. I’ve known Mike for a number of years. He was an early innovator in the development of SBAS technology at Satloc as well as SBAS and DGPS receiver technology at Hemisphere GPS. He is one of the leading GNSS engineers in the world. I’m particularly excited about this event and promise a lively discussion that’s full of useful information, data and concepts that anyone using or considering using GPS/GNSS for mapping, surveying or navigating will find useful.

    Thanks, and see you next time.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Geospatial 2011: Ten Big Ones in Five

    Ok, a little later than other folks out there, but I’m in Belgium and the beer is good.

    Here’s my Ten Big Ones in the geospatial industry for 2011.

     

    Ten Big Ones

     

    1. Open Street Mapping (OpenStreetMap.org)

    Yes, this is real and its gaining traction. This is a Wikipedia-like effort to create a digital map of the world, for anyone to use free of charge. You can be contributor, or you can be a user, or you can be both. Think about it, the latest OpenStreetMap blog is talking about mapping public toilets. Strange, but frighteningly useful.

     

    2. Crowd-sourced data

    Highly related to OpenStreetMap.org but not dependent on said .org, crowd-sourced data has the potential to go viral. It’s going to take one funky app or news story to get people hooked on crowd-sourced data. Of course, that’s a fad, but it has daily usefulness too such as citizen reporting (eg. graffiti, broken sidewalks, downed trees/powerlines, etc). Moving slower will be land surveyors, engineers, land planners who buy into Esri’s Community Base Map initiative that Jack Dangermond promoted at last year’s Esri International User Conference Plenary.

    Mobile Devices, Content, and Other Top GIS Trends

    More on Crowd Sourcing

     

    3. LBS apps

    Watch where the venture capital money is being invested. Like me, you may not like the Wall Street mentality, but you can rest assured that like vultures, they follow the money. And they are putting their money into LBS ventures, such as Foursquare, Gowalla, and Telenav.

    Neither Facebook nor Twitter started as LBS apps, but both went there.

    Got an Android phone? If so, you’ve got a free street navigation tool, Google Maps Navigation.

    Social networking LBS apps are projected to be a multi-billion dollar industry in just a few years.

    What is an LBS App?

     

    4. Location Privacy (think LBS apps)

    LBS apps are highly dependent on knowing where you are.

    GPS is being designed into most mobile phones.

    It’s great to know where you are, but do you want someone else knowing where you are? Your friends? Maybe. An advertiser? Maybe. A stalker? Not.

    This issue is heating up and will got hot in 2011.

    Privacy Push Will Impact Geolocation Sector, Attorney Says

    Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS) Urges FCC to Use Extreme Caution

     

    5. Augmented Reality

    The newest breed of LBS apps has a huge potential. In my opinion, it’s just a matter of time before this technology winds it way into many parts of our lives. In transportation apps alone, it will make our lives a lot more safe.

    It’s hard to contain myself when writing about this technology, so I’ll stop here. You will hear about it and you will experience it, this year and beyond.

    Augmented Reality

    Wikipedia entry

     

    6. Tablet computers

    Did you watch news coverage of last week’s Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas?

    Do you know what they featured?

    Tablet computers.

    ‘Nuf said.

    CBS News coverage at CES

    2011 will be another great year for tablet computers.

     

    7. Galileo

    This is going to sneak up on people in 2011. Galileo (Europe’s version of GPS) will launch its first two satellites in 2011. They are highly compatible with GPS.

    Unlike GPS which launches one satellite at a time, multiple Galileo satellites can be launched at one time. They will launch two-at-a-time to get the first four into orbit.

    The European Commission says they are on schedule to have 18 satellites in orbit by 2014 (more like 2015, though).

    Either way, this is a game-changer.

    It will make L5 a reality sooner than GPS-alone.

    “What’s Going to Happen When High-Accuracy GPS is Cheap?”

    GLONASS? What’s GLONASS?

     

    8. Smart Phones

    Guess what the other hot topic was at the Consumer Electronic Show in Las Vegas last week?

    Yep, smartphones.

    Check out CNET’s Jessica Dolcourt’s comment when asked, “What trends will we see in smartphone hardware and software in the next two to five years?”

    “We’re going to see quad-core processors and 3D. Gaming will really take off with much better processing speeds and hardware acceleration. Battery technology will also have to improve to handle the much richer multimedia. In terms of hardware, NFC (near-field communication) chips will proliferate as one way that smartphones will largely replace physical wallets.”

    I agree. Wallets are going to be so 2010. Good riddance. I didn’t like you in my back pocket anyway.

    Putting on my professional geospatial hat, smartphones will change the way we collect data, period.

    In 2010, Gartner reported that smartphone sales were up 96% in Q3 2010 compared to Q3 2009; 417 million smartphones were sold in Q3 2010 alone!

    And that was before Microsoft introduced the Windows Phone 7.

     

    9. GPS-enabled Digital Cameras

    Ricoh seems to be taking the lead and others are following. As a geospatial professional, it’s clear that you value georeferenced digital photos. It’s one of the most highly searched terms on our website.

    Digital camera sensors are moving towards becoming ubiquitous. It’s going to become just another feature like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, etc.

    GeoSpatial Experts Bundles Three New GPS Cameras with Photo-Mapping Software

     

    10. Cloud Computing

    Didn’t we used to do this, but it was called something else? I think so.

    Nonetheless, it’s got traction again. Think not? Read this.

    Dude, We’re Working in the Cloud

    It won’t replace all client apps, but for non-sensitive content, it’s a no-brainer. It’s a big money-saver for enterprise organizations.

    Microsoft is going to take a hit. Note to self: Sell MSFT stock.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • GIS and Transportation 1930-2011

    By Art Kalinski, GISP

    Looming budget cuts, the uproar against grossly overpaid “public servants” such as in Belle, California, and the growing number of accidents involving elderly drivers have encouraged me to get up on my soapbox in hopes that some of you in the GIS and transportation communities can advance an old idea that may now be right for our time. How are the three events related? They are related to a suggestion I proposed at a planning meeting while serving as a GIS manager at a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) – Jitneys.  To my surprise, I was dressed down for suggesting such a heretical idea. Below it the write up I submitted.

    Jitneys Are a 2-8% Solution to SOVs (Sep 2006)
    Jitney (jit’ne) n.  An operator-owned vehicle that carries one or more passengers for hire, from and to multiple door-to-door locations using the most economical variable route based on the needs of the different passengers and the skill of the driver to meet those needs. The word “Jitney” is an old English slang term for a nickel, which was the cost of a ride when Jitneys became popular in the 1930s. In other countries Jitneys are called: dabas, domus, jeepneys, tap taps, and many other names.

    Pundits say that we are in an environmental crisis, driven by use of single occupant vehicles (SOVs). We want clean air, easy commutes, low taxes with sustainable economic growth. We struggle with encouraging alternatives to SOVs (mass transit, grid road systems, land use mandates, HOV lanes, bike paths) but let’s face facts: The “genie is out of the bottle.” Most cities have evolved into regions shaped by SOVs and nothing short of draconian measures will change that. Perhaps it is time to reconsider an old transportation alternative that could reduce SOV trips 2 to 8 percent — Jitneys.

    Jitneys sprung up in major cities in the 1930s. Typically they were four-door sedans driven by the owner with only the word “JITNEY” painted on the door. Anyone who had a vehicle could become an entrepreneur transporting one or more people for a modest fee. It became a convenient and affordable way for many people to get around. Jitney impact was so significant that special interest groups lobbied to have them outlawed. In 1931 jitneys reduced Los Angeles trolley car use by 25 percent. The trolleys were ultimately displaced by highways and SOVs, which then evolved into the familiar picture of SOV gridlock.

    A major impediment cited by most users to the use of mass transit is getting to and from the transit stop. In high-density locations such as New York City, almost everyone is within two blocks of a transit stop. That is not the case in most other cities, and everyone agrees that it may take decades to change. Most cities have transportation gaps that are being inefficiently filled by SOVs. Low-density communities are not suited for mass transit, and our cul-de-sac and shopping center neighborhoods force the use of SOVs for even the smallest errands. Since most of us have no alternative to SOVs, Jitneys might be able to fill that niche.

    Jitneys could fill the gaps efficiently with no additional taxes needed for new roads or transit. They could solve an Economic Justice (EJ) issue by providing affordable transportation for low wage workers or the elderly. The collective efficiency of jitneys carrying 2-4 passengers (the ultimate car pool) would reduce pollution and the total number of cars on the road. The use of jitneys is a self-correcting system that requires no overarching management system, just natural, local supply and demand. A side employment benefit would be the small business opportunities that would be created for jitney owner/drivers.

    JITNEY SYSTEM PROS

    • No taxes needed for additional mass transit or additional roads.
    • Very efficient since the Jitney system works on supply and demand with a driver who is motivated to minimize wasted seats, mileage, gas, and idle time while maximizing his profit and service to the customer.
    • Should reduce SOV traffic 2 to 8 percent.
    • As a small-scale feeder service, Jitneys may increase the use of mass transit such as commuter rail and bus rapid transit.
    • Should reduce air pollution.
    • Should reduce the need for CBD additional parking.
    • Could eliminate the need for second or third cars in many families, which may have a corresponding effect on mortgage qualification.
    • Would solve some EJ issues, providing convenient transportation that is affordable for low-income workers and empowering those that are most dependent.
    • Jitney drivers become recognized members of their local community by providing personalized service, such as helping the elderly to the car, which fosters a greater sense of “community.”
    • Jitneys already operate successfully in many cities such as San Diego, Miami, the Hispanic community in Atlanta and New York where a jitney (gypsy cab) ride costs $1.
    • Since service is door-to-door there is a greater perception of safety, especially at night.
    • Jitneys provide a safe and convenient transportation alternative for the elderly who at some point should not drive and/or who can’t walk 3-4 blocks to a bus stop.
    • Since jitneys are ideally scaled for neighborhoods and side roads, use of jitneys could free up buses to provide better service on more heavily traveled main routes.
    • Cell phones make contact with the local jitney cheaper, easier, and more efficient than the old mobile radio dispatch system or hand wave flag-down system.
    • Jitneys can respond quickly and organically to changes in demand such a concerts and sports events.
    • Even if jitneys only have a 2 perecnt impact on SOV traffic that would be significant, and there would be little if any financial risk.
    • A network of jitneys could provide quick emergency transportation for large numbers of people in the event of natural disaster or homeland security event

    JITNEY SYSTEM CONS and (ANSWERS)

    • A well-established system of jitneys may compete with mass transit. (Since the percentage of mass transit riders is small, the impact should be minor compared to the impact on SOV users. Jitneys may actually increase the use of mass transit since they are a small-scale feeder service.)
    • Jitneys may not be as safe as a bus. (True, but can we afford to have large buses driving around with four passengers surrounded by dozens of SOVs?  We can’t make life totally risk free and we must ultimately weigh the costs verses the benefits.)
    • Jitneys may reduce pedestrian and bike traffic. (Since the number of walkers and bikers is small, the impact will be minor compared to the impact on SOV users.)
    • Some drivers may be unprofessional. (Licensing could help, but poor drivers would soon develop reputations that would lead to fewer calls and their business would dry up.)
    • Liability and safety issues (Legislation and thinking would have to change permitting jitneys to operate with the understanding that passengers ride at their own peril. This does not mean that there would be zero liability. If a driver drove in a clearly reckless manner or committed a crime he would be liable for damages. To keep insurance at a level that is reasonable, there would have to be some shared risk by the passenger. For instance, a passenger could not sue the driver for injuries sustained in a true traffic accident, or a passenger could not sue for frivolous reasons such as spilling their own hot coffee in their lap.)
    • Sharing a ride with several sweaty strangers may not be comfortable. (This is
      not transportation for everyone; it is an alternate choice for those who have few choices.)
    • Jitneys will take business away from taxi cabs and mass transit. (That could happen but can we afford to “subsidize” systems that are not efficient?  Many believe that jitneys would actually increase mass-transit use by acting as a small scale feeder service.)
    • Jitneys won’t work (It will cost almost nothing to try the concept. There are too many cases where it does work to say that it won’t work without trying it. A big federal program is not needed to solve every problem; give the free market a chance.)
    • Jitneys are flagged down by riders which won’t work in the suburbs (The ubiquitous cell phone changes the model. The driver can be easily called fora pick-up. As for the cost, we already have a working model in our suburbs. Consider the pizza delivery driver using his own vehicle as a jitney for pizzas. The drivers do well financially for the skill level needed.  Just substitute people for pizzas and see how it works.)
    • The term “jitney” sounds low rent, third-worldish. (We can come up with a new name if that’s important to people. Try cellular dispatched cars – CDC, free market transport – FMT, micro van pools – MVP, neighborhood vans, etc.)

    It is folly to think that the American public will fund and then cheerfully switch to mass transit or bikes in significant numbers during the foreseeable future. Jitneys may not be “the” solution but past history shows that they can have a measurable impact reducing the number of SOV trips, perhaps in the range of 2 to  8 percent, and that could buy us some time. Most important – no additional taxes, just permission. With one action we empower our citizens, make them less dependent, reduce SOV traffic, help the elderly, help the poor, create jobs, and create taxpayers.  

    2011 Jitney

    In 2011 there are more jitney-like services springing up under the radar. If we have another gas crisis, I believe the services will explode. I can envision an interesting GIS analysis project mapping jitney tracks compared to SOVs and mass transit while comparing the efficiency and benefits of each. Two organizations are promoting jitneys focused on the needs of the elderly:
    ITN Portland, Maine, is a 10-year-old volunteer organization that has provided transportation alternatives primarily for senior citizens. The organization has a system of vehicles, and paid and volunteer drivers. They have a car donation program and families can set up travel accounts for elderly parents that provide free transportation.

    The Beverly Foundation is a national non-profit that promotes senior transportation and mobility.

    The TRB (Transportation Research Board) has numerous papers and a subcommittee devoted to Jitneys and private cabs. As budgets tighten perhaps jitneys will gain some traction. As a leading-edge member of the baby boomer generation, I hope jitneys will be available when it’s time for me to turn in my license.

    My dressing down was accompanied by an explanation that our job was to get our hands on as much federal funding as possible and this “jitney idea” was a non-starter since it required no federal funding and might actually conflict with the long-range regional transportation plan. Even the chairman of the local Urban League was all for the idea, until he realized that it could compete with the mayor’s goal to build a light rail system.

    As a paid public employee I naively thought our job was to serve the best interests of our citizens. At the risk of sounding Pollyannaish, I gravitated to military service, GIS, and Pictometry because all personified the philosophy of doing the right thing. I also believe in the GISP Code of Ethics and I know that most of you do also. I now believe that the days of wasteful government projects are over and we need to try something different like “Doing the Right Thing.”

    Well, that’s my New Year’s rant. Please contact me regarding your opinion and experience.

    P.S.  I’m going to be at the TRB Visualization Symposium this Summer, date/location TBD.

  • Rocket City GIS and I/ITSEC Conferences

    Two Seemingly Unrelated Conferences Linked by GIS and GISP

    By Art Kalinski, GISP

    In November I attended the Rocket City GIS Conference and the seemingly unrelated Interservice / Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC).

    Rocket City GIS

    The Rocket City GIS Conference was organized by Joe Francica of Directions Media. As Conference Chairman, Joe picked an impressive venue, the U.S. Space and Rocket  Center, Huntsville, Alabama. The facilities are quite extensive, housing the Saturn and other boosters, the shuttle, and countless historic artifacts including space capsules, space suits, and all manner of test equipment, even a real SR-71. The Rocket Center holds Space Camp for youngsters as well as a team-building program for adults and corporations.

    SaturnHuntsville is the home of the original rocket scientists led by Werner von Braun, and home to the NASA Marshall Space Center and Redstone Arsenal. The city has become an extensive technology center with the Rocket Center as a focal point. If you visit, plan on a full day to see it all.

    Although not a large assembly, the Rocket City GIS Conference was very well organized and the meeting facility at the Rocket Center was superb. The keynote speaker for the conference was David DiBiase, the director of the John A. Dutton E-Education Institute for the online GIS program at Pennsylvania State University. In addition, David is a URISA board member and president of the GIS Certification Institute.

    In his opening, David cited two interesting facts. First, according to Forbes magazine, Jack Dangermond, founder of ESRI, is the 164th richest person in the United States. Donald Trump is 153rd. Second, according to the Bureau of Labor there are now 857,000 geo-spatial employees in the United States with expected growth of an additional 350,000 over the next eight years. No one guessed the number was that high.

    In 2003 I was in the first group of GIS professionals to receive the GISP certification. Like many other GIS professionals, I participated in the planning and formulation of the GISP program. I felt that it would help hiring managers in the GIS community by identifying GIS professionals who had achieved a certain level of education and experience. I also felt that it would help URISA since the conferences and courses offered by URISA would take on greater importance as candidates looked to build their professional point totals. The program has proven itself over the past seven years, but some believe that it may need to evolve.

    David caused a bit of a stir by presenting his desire and others to have an exam for future GISP candidates. He indicated that his opinion was not shared by all board members, but there was a growing interest in the prospect. In 2002 we considered an exam as part of the GISP process, but the general consensus was that it would be impossible to come up with an exam that was comprehensive, fair, and a good indicator of a candidate’s qualifications. I’m not sure that the situation is much different in 2010, but I’d like to hear the pros and cons. Time didn’t permit that, and without further discussion I don’t have an opinion yet.

     

    I/ITSEC 2010
    The I/ITSEC conference was held in Orlando and is fairly large. As I reported last year, I/ITSEC continues to evolve from training and gaming technology to much more sophisticated modeling and mission-rehearsal technology. This is a large conference with participation by all the big players such as Lockheed, Boeing, BEA, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and many others.
    VRSIM Display
    The Keynote speaker, Air Force General Edward Rice, summed up the prospects for the training and simulation community. Even with feared budget cuts, funding expectations looked good since modeling and simulation are proving to be so cost effective.
    Most of us think of flight simulators training pilots, and those are still key systems, but other skills are proving equally cost effective. The general cited fuel-boom operators as one example. There is a real art to operating an in-flight fueling boom, and it takes hours and hours to train operators. The new simulators are so realistic that 95% of training leading to qualification is done on simulators with only 5% actual in-flight time need to qualify operators.
    ESRI had a good-size booth demonstrating work of partners such as Precision Light Works 3D models and systems such as Geoweb 3d. The growing evolution from training to actual mission planning and mission rehearsal is driving the need for accurate geospatial data and GIS environments. It’s no longer good enough to just “look good;” the systems also have to reflect reality in a way that wasn’t even attempted a few years ago.
    As a retired naval officer and ship handler, I couldn’t resist testing the Navy bridge simulators by CSC. The navigation charts, GPS, radar, out-the-window graphics, physics, and response were dead-on accurate as I piloted a destroyer through Narragansett Bay. Even the small boat simulators by Kongsberg had hydraulic systems that simulated the motion of the small boat through moderate seas. The only thing missing was the salt spray in the face.
    Sythetic bodyRegrettably, realism of medical simulators had also evolved. They want medical personnel to get over the shock factor of real injuries so they can react efficiently during real emergencies. Some were so realistic with spurting blood and missing limbs that the exhibits were not for the faint-hearted. Here is an example of one company that manufactures realistic bodies to train surgeons.
    GIS is found in medial simulators as well. The spatial and topological tools of GIS are seeing their way into medical simulators that mimic the circulatory systems and other networks.
    At large conferences I always like to visit the small perimeter booths for two reasons. The exhibitors in the outlying sections generally don’t have the budgets that the big companies have, so I try to give them their money’s worth by providing some traffic and visibility. But more importantly, this is where the new technologies are being introduced and some of the booth are quite interesting. One example is this paint booth simulator by VRSim, Inc. The trainee holds a spray gun and wears a helmet with a 3D video display. Using the gun, the trainee sees paint being applied, but even more important, the simulated surface is mapped to later show how heavy the paint was applied. Red = too heavy, Blue = too light, Green = just right.

    Paint booth simulator by VRSim. The user holds a spray gun and wears a helmet with a 3D video display.
    Paint booth simulator by VRSim. The user holds a spray gun and wears a helmet with a 3D video display.
    The simulated surface is mapped to later show how heavy the paint was applied.
    The simulated surface is mapped to later show how heavy the paint was applied.
    Here again spatial data mapping is the basis for the system, and the cost to train an operator is a fraction of the real thing, not to mention wasted paint and fumes.
    Orator Plus, Inc. had as robust multimedia data fusion software that permits the simultaneous display of GIS, PowerPoint, video, live web links, imagery, etc. in one elegant environment that also has a common “whiteboard” annotations and sharing capability. The company even developed a portable hardware display to optimize its system. The display is a rear projection multi-touch screen of light-weight Plexiglas. It’s difficult to explain how nice the system works.  You need to see it in operation.
    Orator Plus's multimedia data fusion software permits the simultaneous display of GIS, PowerPoint, video, live web links, and imagery.
    Orator Plus’s multimedia data fusion software permits the simultaneous display of GIS, PowerPoint, video, live web links, and imagery.
    The second keynote speaker was Dr. R. Bowen Loftin, president of Texas A&M University. His degrees are in physics and he worked extensively for NASA developing virtual environments. His keynote topic was a desire by many to create a certification system / institute for modeling and simulation professionals. This sounded a lot like our GISCI and the GISP program.
    I spoke with Dr. Loftin briefly after his session to see if he was familiar with our GISP certification program.  He was and had used it as one example for discussions.  I later thought to myself that the one advantage we had with the GISP program was our starting point. Although the GISP qualification was not ESRI centric, the common ESRI environments that most of us were operating in created a sense of community and a good foundation for GISP.  There is no such common operating environment for the Modeling and Simulation people, not even close.  There are many competing companies with no over-arching system, which is a big hurdle.  Wait until someone suggests a qualification exam.

     

  • Dude, We’re Working in the Cloud

    Last week, I wrote about the unpredictable software development landscape for tablet computers and smartphones. The iOS (iPhone/iPad) has firmly established its presence, Android is picking up steam like locomotive, and Windows Phone 7 is making its debut.

    I heard from a few readers. One in particular was an employee in a larger enterprise. He bent my ear about “working in the cloud.” He said their office apps were all heading towards being cloud-based, and he suspected that mobile GIS apps were headed that way, too. Essentially, he said that if your tablet or smartphone or whatever runs a compatible web browser, you’re ready for mobile GIS.

    “Dude, we’re working in the cloud.”

    That said, let’s cover the basics…

     

    What Is “the Cloud” and Where Is It?

    The cloud is essentially internet servers (computers) that run the applications your computer uses. These servers reside at companies that offer cloud services. Users connect to those servers via the Internet. For example, instead of installing Microsoft Office on your computer, you would access Microsoft Office applications on the cloud servers using your web browser. All you would need on your computer is a compatible web browser. Essentially, it’s off-loading the IT tasks to someone else. There’s no need to install application software on each desktop computer. With cloud computing, a lot of IT department overhead just disappears. In a true cloud environment, all of your apps reside on servers similar to the diagram shown below.

    Source: Wikipedia.org

    Some of you may be working in “the cloud” already with some of your apps. In my case, the vast majority of the apps on my computer are resident on my computer (I installed them). However, I’m writing this article with an app running in the cloud. I’m not even sure where the server is located. I connect to the cloud server(s) and log in using a standard web browser (Google Chrome at the moment).

    I’m still uneasy with using cloud computing.

    In my limited experience, I’ve had a few negative experiences:

    1. The application responsiveness is dependent on Internet connection and cloud server capacity. I’ve experienced occasions where the app was running very slow (especially when integrating images) due to the server capacity and/or my Internet connection speed. It’s even worse when I’m accessing the Internet using my wireless data card while traveling.
    2. I’ve had occasions when I’ve accidently pressed the wrong key on my keyboad and the application backed up to the previous screen, losing my work.
    3. I’ve accidentally used the web browser running the app to perform a Google search, again losing my work.

    In all fairness, I think #2 and #3 are a function of the app software rather than cloud computing. It should have an “Are you sure?” warning before taking the user away from the app screen.

    Another major concern is information privacy. With cloud computing, every keystroke is sent out into Internet land. That makes the hairs stand up on the back of my neck. Now, I’m sure cloud app providers like Microsoft and Google have thought this out pretty thoroughly, but I’m still hesitant about this. A New York Times article published in 2009 summarized my attitude the best: “Don’t put anything in the cloud you wouldn’t want a competitor, your government, or another government to see.”

    Lastly, the pricing structure is much different than purchasing a CD with your application(s). Cloud computing typically charges a monthly per user fee. For example, Microsoft Office 365 (targeted at small businesses) is US$6 per month per user.

     

    How Is Cloud Computing Going to Affect GIS Data Collection (Mobile GIS)?

    The readers who contacted me in response to last week’s article all believe that cloud computing will dominate mobile GIS in the future. For the most part, they said that the operating system of the device, whether it’s iOS (Apple), Android (Google), or Windows Phone 7 (Microsoft), won’t be a major factor as long as the smartphone (or other mobile device) can run a web browser. Notice I haven’t mentioned BlackBerry much. I’m not sure they are a long-term player in this game.

    Esri has already made its push into GIS cloud computing with its introduction of arcgis.com earlier this year, and then subsequent introductions and updates of its iOS ArcGIS app and API and plans for an Android app, and I imagine, Windows Phone 7, too. Cloud computing was, obviously, a major topic at the Esri International User Conference last summer.

    I believe there will be many, many GIS apps for smartphones. It’s hard to debate that. One of our readers, Larry Evans, manages the GIS unit, among other things, for the State of West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. He also teaches undergraduate- and graduate-level courses on GIS at Marshall University.

    Larry was kind enough to send some compelling slides from his course that illustrate the emerging smartphone boom. It’s no secret, but certainly makes one think about where we will be in five years with respect to mobile GIS.

    Mobile Devices: Next Computing Cycle? (Courtesy: Larry Evans)

     

    Wireless data growth (Courtesy: Larry Evans)

     

    Mobile data growth (Courtesy: Larry Evans)

     

    New Kids in Town (Courtesy: Larry Evans)

     

    Larry writes:

    The one thing I’m certain about in all this is that as the mobile side technology matures we’ll see much more powerful mobile apps that bridge that gap to professional mapping/surveying. As mobile begins to tap better into the potential of sensory networks, things get really interesting in a hurry. Future GPS chips, as we all know, will be an order of magnitude more accurate because of the greater number of SVs (GPS satellites) overhead and our ability to improve antennas and receiver sensitivities. I seem to recall you did a great little write-up of that not long ago. To sum up where my head’s at, I guess I’m in the “they will build it and it will come” camp on professional geospatial apps. Once I have the tools, then I’ll build my own solutions customized for the kinds of things I want to do geospat
    ially.

    While I’m sold on the fact that mobile GIS apps will experience tremendous growth on smartphones over the next few years, I’m not so sure about professional geospatial apps like ArcPad, TDS Solo, Carlson SurvCE, Trimble Terrasync, Topcon Topsurv, CMT Field CE, etc. I’m not convinced for a couple of reasons.

    First of all, the market size for those apps is really not very big, which makes it difficult to justify the development cost of moving to an iOS or Android. However, the bright spot would be Windows Phone 7, because that would be a migration of software (Windows Mobile to Windows Phone 7) rather than a rewrite.

    Secondly, smartphones aren’t going to eliminate the industrial handheld data-collector market. Data collectors from TDS/Trimble, Juniper Systems, Handheld, Getac, Leica, Topcon, etc., will still have a place in the professional geospatial fields such as forestry, surveying, engineering, GIS, and construction. In those applications, smartphones are not robust enough (physically) to be trusted when a hardware failure can cost thousands of dollars in lost data and/or productivity.

     

     

    Webinar (January 26, 2011): GPS SBAS, DGPS or Post-processing? Which One Should You Use?

    If you are using or plan on using GPS for mobile GIS, you should seriously consider attending this webinar.

    Learn the real story behind each of these technologies without a salesperson’s bias.

    Tens of thousands of users around the world utilize GPS/GNSS receivers for mapping, surveying and navigating. Since autonomous GPS/GNSS typically does not provide the needed accuracy, users must rely on a source of GPS/GNSS corrections. There are three sources of GPS/GNSS corrections available to users who desire reliable GPS/GNSS accuracy in the sub-meter to three meter range: SBAS, DGPS and post-processing. Dr. Michael Whitehead, VP of Technology at Hemisphere GPS, will join me in presenting a background on the three technologies as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each.

    I’ve known Mike for a number of years. He was an early innovator in the development of SBAS technology at Satloc as well as SBAS and DGPS receiver technology at Hemisphere GPS. He is one of the leading GNSS engineers in the world. I’m particularly excited about this event and promise a lively discussion that’s full of useful information, data, and concepts that anyone using or considering using GPS/GNSS for mapping, surveying, or navigating will find useful.

     

     

    Geospatial Solutions Weekly holiday schedule

    We won’t be publishing the Geospatial Solutions Weekly newsletter for the next two weeks. The next issue will be emailed to you the week of January 3, 2011. However, we will continue to post news items on our website and I will continue to “Twitter” when I come across something interesting.

    Have a safe and happy holiday season.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric