![]() Is very clear about what must be returned. Sites that were just giving images of existing maps! Why? Because WMS I think some people were surprised by the So when a client asksĢ) WMS was originally designed for vector data with the knowledge that Perhaps you canġ) There are no WMS requirements about clients. I am finding some of this discussion a bit puzzling. Google pay part of the costs, while the other customers of Digital Globe, etcĪllow Google’s purchases to be cross-subsidised. User? If so who is really paying for it? Right now those who advertise on ![]() Sole provider of imagery to the world do you think it will stay free to the Private and commercial users come to the view that all of these should be / areĪvailable for free from Google then who is going to pay the cost? I am fairlyĬertain that just now Google do not pay their suppliers anywhere near the realĬost of the imagery if there were no other customers. Satellites or aircraft cost real money that somebody has to pay. Getmapping, Digital Globe, whoever sold their images to Google, and so forth. ![]() Or air photos, not to mention no doubt violate the licence terms under which Would also probably wipe out most of the market for anyone buying satellite imagery I am sure that if Google was available asĪ WMS then somebody would know about it by now. Just extended to repeatedly capture views and insert them into MapInfo. Right – mbx that grabs one image and adds MapInfo registration to it) but So itĬould well be something along the lines of the GELINK mbx (I think that is That would not be the case if it was a genuine WMS. Every time you pan or zoom in MapInfo you have to do a refresh to However, I don’t think it is accessing a WMS at all.įrom my colleagues examination it seems it takes a screen grab from Google of We have tried out the Google MI plugin and This mapperG product is good, I just wish we could connect directly toĪ google wms feed (even for a fee) without having to Install a tool in Understood it well enough to decide it would be better to leave thisĮither way, I think, based also on the feedback of this post, that Understand the market potential of doing so, or in the contrary, Google rather than a "software development".Īnd in that sense, if my understanding of how this product works isĬorrect, then would it not make more sense for google to outright sellĪ membership to their wms feed. Purchassing seems more of an actual license to use the data outside of Is pretty straightforward ( connecting to a wms source), What we are My point is, since this "product" uses a functionality in mapinfo that I also agree that the makers of MapperG were very smart in makin this Then again, Google Satellite data has it'sĭrawbacks, but at that price, one would be in a bad position to I agree that 400$ is not that much to have google map satelliteīackdrop in Mipro. > Unless there is one that is free but not advertised anywhere? > interested in commercialising a WMS service. > I am guessing this company saw the opportunity and that google is not > money goes to google and then why buy a product, all we need is the > I am wondering why I should pay 400$ for this product. > I recently stumbled on a commercial product called MapperG that seems > -Sure here is the url of the WMS from google! > Saw a couple of posts regarding how to bring in Google maps satellite > Subject: is there a WMS feed of google maps I can connect to using > exactly the same price as a GE Pro licence. > How interesting that the price you are quoting is > Pitney Bowes Business Insight - MapInfo > Of course that might depend on the licensing > To be able to use satellite data of the entire world within MapInfo Pro? > To: Subject: Re: is there a WMS feed of google maps I can connect to using MIpro > From: [mailto: On Behalf Of Peter Horsbøll Møller
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |