Search

Geodata creation:past, present and future

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    When I started in GIS, it looked a bit like this (I exaggerate slightly, but only just)
    For a long time geospatial technology was a backroom thing, and still is in many places - a lot of FUD about needing special training etc

    Only companies that could justify “GIS” were those like utilities, telecom companies, government agencies, etc - largely because of the cost of data (which we’ll talk about more)

    Google Earth was cool and fun - everyone liked to fly to their house etc
    Big step in making people more aware of online maps / geospatial data

    Why was Google Maps so successful?
    Great performance and usability - slippy maps and AJAX
    Biggest single factor was the API, spawned the real growth in “neogeography”

    Google Earth was cool and fun - everyone liked to fly to their house etc
    Big step in making people more aware of online maps / geospatial data
    Why was Google Maps so successful?
    Great performance and usability - slippy maps and AJAX
    Biggest single factor was the API, spawned the real growth in “neogeography”

    In the early days of GIS, 20-25 years ago, only companies that could really justify the cost and effort were those with lots of geospatial data of their own - utilities, local and central government agencies, etc
    Really major effort to create and maintain their own data (pre-GPS)
    In some cases may have been able to use government map data, in others not (typically not in the US)

    Nobody would argue with that, surely? Especially here? Well, it’s not as simple as it might seem ...

    Free speech and free data, but not free beer sadly :(

    I don’t know how closely you all follow the US election, but this was widely considered a turning point in the campaign ...
    I’m joking of course, but the point is that we can’t imagine a politician advocating raising taxes or cutting funding on schools to do better mapping

    USGS doesn’t have the resources to create large scale maps, small scale maps are generally 10+ years out of date
    Utilities, telcos, local governments all do their own base mapping - huge duplication of effort. Made worse because of major inconsistencies in data between agencies

    This is an example of a USGS topo map

    This is an example of a USGS topo map

    Bottom line is that geodata creation is expensive using traditional methods, no easy way around that

    Bottom line is that geodata creation is expensive using traditional methods, no easy way around that

    Bottom line is that geodata creation is expensive using traditional methods, no easy way around that

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    The two main companies focused on commercial street data
    Navteq now owned by Nokia, and Tele Atlas owned by TomTom
    Does this risk more restriction on availability of data? Potential conflict
    Mainly focused on automative navigation, street maps as a byproduct
    NAVTEQ spent $330m maintaining their database in 2007 (Autocarto presentation)

    In general, licensing costs are relatively expensive - reflecting the cost of data capture
    Expensive iPhone app is normally $9.95

    $10,000 per million sessions for GM enterprise
    Microsoft tile based - $8000 per x tiles

    Big question is whether this model is sustainable ... not clear whether GYM are making any money from maps
    Has been an aggressive battle to try to gain market share. Interesting parallel with early days of GIS - business model was not clear, required an act of faith to make big investment in data
    Microsoft had said they were investing hundreds of millions - but recently made significant layoffs in Virtual Earth team, several senior people moved on
    Yahoo recently released their GeoPlant data as a free download - widely welcomed, but also makes you wonder if they have give up on trying to make money (and lots of upheaval at Yahoo in general)
    So has Google almost “won the war” ... and if so will they be more aggressive about trying to make some money?

    6 Favorites

    Geodata creation:past, present and future - Presentation Transcript

    1. © 2009 CloudMade. Map data © 2009 OpenStreetMap.org Geodata creation: past, present and future Peter Batty Amsterdam, June 2009
    2. Denver, CO Denver, CO USA USA “Mousetrap” junction of I-25 and I-70 Cape Royal Grand Canyon, AZ Cropston USA England
    3. Overview • A little geohistory • 4 business models for geodata • Crowdsourcing • Future geodata directions
    4. a little geohistory
    5. GIS was a specialized backroom technology for many years
    6. Geo moving to the mainstream 1996 MapQuest 2004 Google Earth (Keyhole) 2005 Google Maps
    7. Disruptive technology Functionality / logy performance chno he d te bl is E sta Mainstream Market requirements logy c hno te ptive ru Dis Time
    8. 4 business models for geodata
    9. 1: Build your own
    10. Return on Investment (ROI) is still a big focus
    11. Model 1 Summary (Build your own) Creating geodata is very expensive* €$£¥ *Using traditional methods
    12. 2: Let the Government do it
    13. Everyone’s favorite punchbag
    14. “Our taxes fund the collection of public data - yet we have to pay again to access it. [Make] it freely available to stimulate innovation” The Guardian “Free Our Data” web site
    15. sadly it’s not that simple ... Taxes only pay some of the costs Costs are ongoing, not one off Many competing priorities for tax money All geodata is not equal Commercial companies can profit
    16. Land of the Free
    17. I think we should raise taxes or cut spending on schools to do better mapping
    18. National Mapping Program Employees (Selected years for which data could be found) 3500 3000 !"#$%&'()'*#+,(-%%. 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Slide courtesy Larry Moore, from Briefing to the USGS State Partnerships Meeting
    19. USGS Topo Map
    20. Missing Pepsi Center (Built 10 years ago) USGS Topo Map
    21. TIGER data US Census Bureau
    22. The US situation There is no large scale “national map” Almost all utilities and local governments do their own base mapping Therefore most cities are mapped many times - huge duplication of effort Typically there are significant inconsistencies between basemaps (tens or hundreds of meters not uncommon)
    23. National Mapping Agencies Cost Good product but expensive Free or cheap but product lacking Product
    24. National Mapping Agencies Cost Good product but expensive We want to be here ... but no easy solution Free or cheap but product lacking Product
    25. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence
    26. Model 2 Summary (Government data) Creating geodata is very expensive* “Free data” policy is not a panacea €$£¥ *Using traditional methods
    27. 3: Buy commercially
    28. “Creating, maintaining and delivering a comprehensive, high quality map database is a multi-step, labor-intensive process. We currently employ over 270 employees in our centralized production facility and a global workforce of over 700 geographic analysts in 32 countries”
    29. Database 2007 data 69 countries 11m miles (18m km) of roads 18m points of interest People “Creating, maintaining and delivering a comprehensive, high quality map database is a Field force 700 multi-step, labor-intensive process. We Central production 270 currently employ over 270 employees in our centralized production facility and a global Technology 500 workforce of over 700 geographic analysts in 32 countries” Total 3349 Financial Revenue $853m (~€604m) Data creation & distribution costs $396m (~€280m)
    30. In 2007, there were more than 57 billion route planning transactions using North American NAVTEQ data on leading web sites revenue from this was “not substantial”
    31. €$£¥ Navigon MobileNavigator for Europe, for iPhone $94.99 (~€67)
    32. Model 3 Summary (Buy commercial data) Creating geodata is very expensive* Some improvement through sharing of costs between more companies €$£¥ *Using traditional methods
    33. 4: Free* commercial services
    34. Free as in Beer Speech
    35. Free as in Beer Speech (Gratis) (Libre)
    36. Free* commercial services * as in beer, with strings attached Google Microsoft Yahoo! All based mainly on data produced using model 3 ... but service provider pays
    37. Now easy to include location data Free or cheap Location Geocoding map data tracking
    38. Google Maps API Terms of Service Application must be free to the public (paraphrased) No access to underlying (vector) data No use for real time navigation, dispatch, fleet management or business asset tracking No use of geocodes except with a Google map No creation of a derivative work of any content In future, Google may ... ... limit number of transactions ... include ads on map images
    39. OffMaps
    40. Model 4 Summary (Free commercial data) Has enabled huge growth in geo ... but terms limiting for many apps Creating geodata is still expensive* Is this model sustainable? €$£¥ *Using traditional methods
    41. The continuing issue is that geodata creation is fundamentally labor-intensive and therefore expensive
    42. Crowdsourcing
    43. Crowdsourcing changes everything!!! (Scene from State of the Map 2011)
    44. can crowdsourcing deliver good enough quality?
    45. Web 2.0  Web 1.0  Web 2.0  DoubleClick  Google AdSense  Ofoto  Flickr  Akamai  BitTorrent  mp3.com  Napster  Britannica Online  Wikipedia  personal websites  blogging  Evite  upcoming.org and EVDB  domain name speculation  search engine optimization  page views  cost per click  screen scraping  web services  PUBLISHING  PARTICIPATION  content management systems  wikis  directories (taxonomy)  tagging ("folksonomy")  Stickiness  syndication Source: Tim O’Reilly, via Geoff Zeiss
    46. Jan 2007
    47. Wikipedia
    48. Hurricane Katrina New Orleans
    49. Hurric Hurricane Katrina scipionus.com
    50. Landgate Perth, Western Australia
    51. Google MapMaker
    52. Google MapMaker
    53. OpenStreetMap!!
    54. December 3, 2007
    55. December 3, 2007 Google OpenStreetMap
    56. December 3, 2007 Google OpenStreetMap July 7, 2009
    57. December 3, 2007 Google OpenStreetMap July 7, 2009
    58. 132,764 users 24m km of highways 34m km of ways crazy OSM stats from May 2009 momentum!! NAVTEQ had 18m km of highways in Dec 2007
    59. Strategic Areas for OSM Managing Trust, Workflow and Validation Licensing and Legal Relationship with “the big guys” Focus / Scope
    60. Great scope for business users to be contributors
    61. Model 5 Summary (Open crowdsourcing) Creating geodata is no longer expensive!! Much more sustainable than other models Not only cheaper, scope for greater detail and more timely updates
    62. The Future Geodata Trends
    63. Sensors Traffic UWB Weather Wi-Fi Video Cell towers GPS RFID
    64. Scope for automatic data gathering Identify changes Additional data - speed limits, one way, turn restrictions Prompts - “the road you are on has no name in OSM” Real time traffic??
    65. Multimedia geotagged photos Multimedia Streetview / panoramas Spatio-temporal Multimedia 3D Photosynth
    66. Summary
    67. Summary OpenStreetMap Rocks!!
    68. Credits Ludovic Bertron Bryan Brennemann Neil Cain laverrue kainr Pimpmaster Jazz Photos from flickr used under Creative Commmons Attribution license

    + Peter BattyPeter Batty, 4 months ago

    custom

    1205 views, 6 favs, 1 embeds more stats

    My keynote presentation from the State of the Map 2 more

    More info about this document

    CC Attribution License

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 1205
      • 1203 on SlideShare
      • 2 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 6
    • Downloads 78
    Most viewed embeds
    • 2 views on https://moodle.umn.edu

    more

    All embeds
    • 2 views on https://moodle.umn.edu

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories

    Tags

    -->
    Search
    RSS Feed
    What's new?

    © 2009 SlideShare Inc. All Rights Reserved