MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
Mayer, Mike
Hello,
My company is currently considering migrating from MapInfo to ArcGIS, I was curious if anyone out there has done this migration and if they might be able to give us a little input. If anyone else could provide any details such as the pros and cons, that would be great. Thanks in advance.
Mike Mayer
GIS Technician
Miramar Hope Bay Ltd.
Suite 300 - 889 Harbourside Drive
North Vancouver, BC V7P 3S1
email: mma...@miramarmining.com
Fax: (604) 980-0731
Toll Free: 1-800-663-8780
Yvonne Bowen
everything you forgot! ANTI-ESRI!!!!
Yvonne Bowen, GIS Technician
Strongbow Exploration Inc.
Suite 800-625 Howe St Vancouver, B.C.
V6C 2T6
(604) 668-8373
www.strongbowexploration.com
-----Original Message-----
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mapi...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Mayer, Mike
Sent: August 24, 2007 2:32 PM
To: mapi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MI-L] MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
Hello,
My company is currently considering migrating from MapInfo to ArcGIS, I
was curious if anyone out there has done this migration and if they
might be able to give us a little input. If anyone else could provide
any details such as the pros and cons, that would be great. Thanks in
advance.
Mike Mayer
GIS Technician
Miramar Hope Bay Ltd.
Suite 300 - 889 Harbourside Drive
North Vancouver, BC V7P 3S1
email: mma...@miramarmining.com <mailto:mma...@miramarmining.com>
Lawley, Russell S
ArcGIS is much improved over arcview3.x, personally i find the menus and gui options still a little 'mixed up' sometimes, and the online help is only for serious nerds who are contractually obliged to regard any normal use of written english as perverse. but overall its an extremely powerful gis and for setting up map layouts/ object styles, and layer settings it has many strengths compared with Mi.
Creating and editing data with arc is still cumbersome compared with mi even though there are lots of inbuilt tools for cad; i quickly tire of it, so i tend to swap between the two, using mi for 'making 'and arc for presenting. But the big thing...and you need to think long and hard here....you MUST identify what you use gis for , and you must do this in DETAIL. You can then get your esri provider to tell you which licence version covers your user needs (and ask them twice over every single item!). in the uk there are three levels of arcGIS licence: arcview, arceditor and arcworkstation (in increasing order of functionality and price)...i personally would NOT swap my mapinfo 9 (or indee mi 6.5) with just arcview 9.2.....this is laregly because the 'arcview' version doesnt cover all my gis needs ie i do a lot of 3d and 2.5d working with grids etc and quite a few of the tools in arcview are 'unavalaible'...in fact a surprising number of 'must have' gis tools only appear in the workstation version (and some oddities occur at editor level ie you can convert an ascii grid to arc, but not export an arcgrid to ascii)..each step up the licence ladder is $$$ (or £££ in my money)
With arcgis you also get arccatalog (i alway find this a curious prog....it doesnt do all thatmuch...why esri made it separate from view/editor/wrkstn is beyond me) but basically you can set up some very robust metadata and projection stuff here and corporate-wise if you need documententation control, arc catalog wipes the floor with the 'small tools' mi uses for this.....you can also buy some nice extras like arcglobe/arcscene which make the mi-3d window look laughably amateurish nowadays (it used to be fab--of course!...) and arcgis is 3d compliant at node level (check the licence first..i suspect you'll need editor for 3d)
Have been using mi and esri for 14 years now, so i will happily make the following purely personal opinions
mi is faster for most things
mi gui is old and many interfaces are distinctly not 'modern windows' (colour/style pickers...omg!), whereas arc, is 'modern' and intuitive but still has a few windows-conventions issues (imho)
mi is more stable and a lot less buggy
mi runs on cheaper kit/laptops (but all kit is cheap nowadays unless you are really tied to old pcs...but do check! arcgis is bloated!! and the claimed min spec is unrealistic for a professional user)
programming-wise arc uses a v large and complex object model that is powerful, if a nightmare to learn, and is suspiciously not backwardly compatible between some versions (i am totally fedup of funding near-wholesale code rewrites everytime we get an arc upgrade!) mapbasic is a doddle but slow. (arc uses vbe too which is also a doddle of course...but serious coders use other languages..hence the object model/compatibility issues)
esri extensions are numerous and expensive (and in the case of spatial analyst ...wholly dissappointing), mapinfo extensions are fewer but cheaper, but some are not 'progressing' (vm!).
arc development of its product has been enormous (they havent always got it right, but the changes are hard to miss) Mi has also developed strongly, but new versions are occaisionally 'little steps'...so if you are used to 'little steps' on upgrades, be aware that esri can and do occasionally 'start from scratch' and this can leave you trapped with either old code or a compulsory upgrade.
they are essentially different and yet the same, switching from mi to arcgis is not as big a leap as it used to be, but expect costs and expect a learning curve...to be on the safe side...save a copy of mi .... it still impresses the pants off me that i can convert a shape file into MI, edit it, convert it back to shape and then recolour it using the the avl files before the arcgis splash screen has even disappeared, let alone opened the file.
i wish you luck on your learning curve(s)
r
-----Original Message-----
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Mayer, Mike
Sent: Fri 24/08/2007 22:31
To: mapi...@googlegroups.com
Cc:
Subject: [MI-L] MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
My company is currently considering migrating from MapInfo to ArcGIS, I was curious if anyone out there has done this migration and if they might be able to give us a little input. If anyone else could provide any details such as the pros and cons, that would be great. Thanks in advance.
Mike Mayer
GIS Technician
Miramar Hope Bay Ltd.
Suite 300 - 889 Harbourside Drive
North Vancouver, BC V7P 3S1
***************************************************************************************************************
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
***************************************************************************************************************
Lawley, Russell S
r
-----Original Message-----
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Mayer, Mike
Sent: Fri 24/08/2007 22:31
To: mapi...@googlegroups.com
Cc:
Subject: [MI-L] MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
My company is currently considering migrating from MapInfo to ArcGIS, I was curious if anyone out there has done this migration and if they might be able to give us a little input. If anyone else could provide any details such as the pros and cons, that would be great. Thanks in advance.
Mike Mayer
GIS Technician
Miramar Hope Bay Ltd.
Suite 300 - 889 Harbourside Drive
North Vancouver, BC V7P 3S1
cameyo
8.5.1/9.0 and ArcGIS 9.2.
I think the two software address two different user and task.
Mapinfo is like a swiss-knife for GIS data, while ArcGIS is more
oriented to work with large data. ESRI have a suite of application
(ArcGIS, ArcSDE, ArcIMS) to cover all, but are very expensive
(40.000€) and the support is not so good. More the ArcGIS has a lot of
geoprocessing tools, but the overall application is a bit
rusty...forget SQL on ArcGIS (very different from MI).
Personally i work with Mapinfo for 80%-90% of my works and use ArcGIS
only for special task.
cameyo
p.s. Yes, ArcGIS is more buggy than MI...
James Redd
destroys ArcMap when it comes to making maps. I know you didn't
mention this and were only looking for pointers about the conversion,
but keep it in mind. I use the Universal Translator often, but I am
only working with data inside of 2 US counties.
ArcMap for analysis, MapInfo for maps.
James
Warren Vick, Europa Technologies Ltd.
> MapInfo destroys ArcMap when it comes to making maps.
I disagree. ArcMap (even in ArcView) has far more control over cartographic
style, better standard labelling and is scalable to a high-end cartographic
labelling solution (Maplex). ArcGIS software is still quirky in many ways,
especially if you come from a MapInfo background, but it's generally far
more powerful and scalable. You do however have to put in a lot of effort to
get the best results out.
Regards,
Warren Vick
Europa Technologies Ltd.
http://www.europa-tech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mapi...@googlegroups.com] On
david
On Sep 1, 1:13 pm, "Warren Vick, Europa Technologies Ltd."
<wv...@europa-tech.com> wrote:
> Hello James,
> Hi Mike
I'm currently working with both ArcGIS (9.2) and Mapinfo (8.1) and
moving back and forth between the two.
For what its worth few comments as follows.
I find it a nuisance that I can ArcGIS does not allow points, lines
and polygons in the same layer (major migration issue for me)
We've about 6TB of Mapdata (layers etc), ArcCatalogue allows for
easier management, with Mapinfo your more reliant on the native
Operating system software, although bugs in ArcCatalogue where it
does
not automatically refresh could do with being sorted out (you move a
file into a directory, hit refresh several times and it still the
file
is not shown) .
ArcGIS there are problems with backward compatibility (I cannot read
a
9.2 mxd file with 9.1), when you migrate to Arc if your utilizing
several machines and need to upgrade you'll need to upgrade them all
at once.
Whereas between mapinfo 7.5 and 8.1 compatibility works both ways.
Raster registration is different process in Arc to Mapinfo, any
Raster
images will need to be re-registered, although the orthorectyfying
and
rubber sheeting with Arc is superior to Mapinfo.
Dual screen capability is superior in Arc as ArcMap/Arcscene/
ArcCatlogue to Mapinfo (Drag and drop from one screen (arcCatalogue)
to second screen (arcMap) gives far better control of the layers and
the fact that the 'layer control' box can always visible in Arc, if
necessary on the second screen.
Special characters sets are not easily shown in Arc (fristance some
of
the Norwegian Place names have unusual characters), they can be
copied/
pasted into a map but cannot be represented in the metadata without a
lot of effort - which seems a bit daft.
I still find with ArcGIS 9.2 with sp3 I still get a message "ArcMap
encountered an error and is closing down", probably twice per day,
its
not just me, happens to most of my colleagues, there are about a
dozen
of us using ArcGIS. In 9 months since we've been using Mapinfo 8.1 it
hasn't happened.
I've just had to complete 40 odd maps for publication in both Arc and
Mapinfo format (electronic availability).
The finished product looks more of less the same, think the options
with ArcGIS make the ArcMaps look superior. The Mapinfo maps took
about 2/3 of the time of the ArcMaps, the Arc solution, although more
convoluted is easier to manage. The Metadata management is much
easier
in ArcGis
Summary (for me) ArcGis (9.2) is a superior package, but still needs
improvement as its unstable and a bit quirky.
Hope this helps
> > MapInfo destroys ArcMap when it comes to making maps.
>
> I disagree. ArcMap (even in ArcView) has far more control over cartographic
> style, better standard labelling and is scalable to a high-end cartographic
> labelling solution (Maplex). ArcGIS software is still quirky in many ways,
> especially if you come from a MapInfo background, but it's generally far
> more powerful and scalable. You do however have to put in a lot of effort to
> get the best results out.
>
> Regards,
> Warren Vick
> Europa Technologies Ltd.http://www.europa-tech.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mapi...@googlegroups.com] On
>
> Behalf Of James Redd
> Sent: 31 August 2007 21:38
> To: MapInfo-L
> Subject: [MI-L] Re: MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
>
> I agree with the previous posters but nobody mentioned output. MapInfo
> destroys ArcMap when it comes to making maps. I know you didn't
> mention this and were only looking for pointers about the conversion,
> but keep it in mind. I use the Universal Translator often, but I am
> only working with data inside of 2 US counties.
>
> ArcMap for analysis, MapInfo for maps.
>
> James- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Davis, Robert
ArcView and ArcInfo into the single ArcGIS product. At that time, an
ArcInfo coverage could contain all data types, points, lines, polygons,
annotation in a single file, which was readable easily in ArcView, as a
single multi-type file. It is true, though, that shape files could only
contain a single data type, so if the conversion is to be ArcInfo to MI
tabs or vice versa, you may have to go via a shapefile, and thus a
single data type for each.
This is an interesting debate as we are currently undertaking a review
of our GIS strategy and platform. We will watch with interest what
other experiences subscribers to this list have to share on the various
advantages/disadvantages of the various competing products out there.
Robert Davis
GIS Project Officer
City of Port Phillip
Ph 9209 6773
Fax 9536 2732
-----Original Message-----
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mapi...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of david
Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2007 11:04 PM
To: MapInfo-L
Subject: [MI-L] Re: MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
Hi James
I'm currently working with both ArcGIS (9.2) and Mapinfo (8.1) and
moving back and forth between the two.
For what its worth few comments as follows.
I find it a nuisance that I can ArcGIS does not allow points, lines and
polygons in the same layer (major migration issue)
We've about 6TB of Mapdata (layers etc), ArcCatalogue allows for easier
management, with Mapinfo your more reliant on the native Operating
system software, although bugs in ArcCatalogue where it does not
automatically refresh could do with being sorted out (you move a file
into a directory, hit refresh several times and it still the file is not
shown)
ArcGIS there are problems with backward compatibility (I cannot read a
9.2 mxd file with 9.1), when you migrate to Arc if your utilizing
several machines and need to upgrade you'll need to upgrade them all at
once.
Whereas between mapinfo 7.5 and 8.1 compatibility works both ways.
Raster registration is different process in Arc to Mapinfo, any Raster
images will need to be re-registered, although the orthorectyfying and
rubber sheeting with Arc is superior to Mapinfo.
Dual screen capability is superior in Arc as ArcMap/Arcscene/
ArcCatlogue to Mapinfo (Drag and drop from one screen (arcCatalogue) to
second screen (arcMap) gives far better control of the layers and the
fact that the 'layer control' box can always visible in Arc, if
neceaasry on the second screen.
Special characters sets are not easily shown in Arc (fristance some of
the Norwegian Place names have unusual characters), they can be copied/
pasted into a map but cannot be represented in the metadata without a
lot of effort - which seems a bit daft.
I still find with ArcGIS 9.2 with sp3 I still get a message "ArcMap
encountered an error and is closing down", probably twice per day, its
not just me, happens to most of my colleagues, there are about a dozen
of us using ArcGIS. In 9 months since we've been using Mapinfo 8.1 it
hasn't happened.
I've just had to complete 40 odd maps for publication in both Arc and
Mapinfo format (electronic availability).
The finished product looks more of less the same, think the options with
ArcGIS make the ArcMaps look superior. The Mapinfo maps took about 2/3
of the time of the ArcMaps, the Arc solution, although more convoluted
is easier to manage. The Metadata management is much easier in ArcGis
Summary (for me) ArcGis (9.2) is a superior package, but still needs
improvement as its unstable and a bit quirky.
Hope this helps
On Sep 1, 1:13 pm, "Warren Vick, Europa Technologies Ltd."
<wv...@europa-tech.com> wrote:
> Hello James,
>
esrispy
major drawbacks of MAPINFO is the formats, ESRI now have 2 great
database formats Personal Geodatabase .mdb = good compatibility with
acess for example and now 9.2 Filegeodatabase wich seems very fast and
low space consuming.
The third db format SDE goedatabse is great for storing larger
datasets and making the dataset public to a broader mass.
Also the new teknique ESRI have embraced.. Everything is in your hands
from great developement SDKs as V.studio, and even with the freeware
express edition will take you a long way.
Also a very good thing when working with geoprocessing is the very
powerful Modelbuilder, you can make up highly complex models (Visual
IDE), then just export the model to a script , VB, python or whatever,
then run them as batchscript to do big processings night time for
example. I am sure you will have great help of modelbuilder to batch
convert tons of Tab files to one of the nice Database formats of
ESRI.
Major drawbacks are the price...But as for everything, you get what
you pay for
As for working with ArcObjects/MapBasic there is just no way to
compere the 2 anymore, ArcObjecst is a Gigant in comparision
What do you get in MapBasic? it does not even have syntax
highlightning out of the box for crying out loud :-O
I must say I was surprised to hear M.I. seemes to have put the
"Project Grande" in the duistbin.
On 3 Sep, 00:18, "Davis, Robert" <RDa...@portphillip.vic.gov.au>
wrote:
> > James- Dölj citerad text -
>
> - Visa citerad text -
Uffe Kousgaard
> major drawbacks of MAPINFO is the formats, ESRI now have 2 great
> database formats Personal Geodatabase .mdb = good compatibility with
> acess for example and now 9.2 Filegeodatabase wich seems very fast and
> low space consuming.
Except for SHP, most ESRI formats are not public and they are not backwards
compatible. Try to open your ArcGIS 9.2 geodatabase in 9.1.
> Also a very good thing when working with geoprocessing is the very
> powerful Modelbuilder, you can make up highly complex models (Visual
> IDE), then just export the model to a script , VB, python or whatever,
> then run them as batchscript to do big processings night time for
> example.
A former colleague of mine has told me how even "night time" wasn't enough
since python and the gigantic ArcObjects model is so complex that even
simple processing ended up taking forever. He started recoding some of the
processing in Delphi and the same computations took minutes to complete.
> I am sure you will have great help of modelbuilder to batch
> convert tons of Tab files to one of the nice Database formats of
> ESRI.
As soon as you have bought the Data Interoperability extension. 2500 USD in
the US. For the rest of us it is typically more expensive.
> Major drawbacks are the price...
Indeed.
> As for working with ArcObjects/MapBasic there is just no way to
> compere the 2 anymore, ArcObjecst is a Gigant in comparision
> What do you get in MapBasic? it does not even have syntax
> highlightning out of the box for crying out loud :-O
MapBasic is lacking in many areas, but it is fairly easy to use. That can't
be said about ArcObjects.
> I must say I was surprised to hear M.I. seemes to have put the
> "Project Grande" in the duistbin.
Maybe MapInfo Corp was afraid MapInfo Pro .NET was going to be as slow as
ArcGIS or even worse? But it is of course a pity so much time has been
wasted on the project, if the resources could have been spent on other
improvements.
Regards
Uffe Kousgaard
esrispy
yes you got some good points there, as for the performance
departement of ArcGIS, startup of the program have been a major drag
in the past, anyhow they have improved alot there too. I never
experienced slow geoprocessing though (exept once when batchconverting
150 layouts to PDF documents) maby some python issue? I did all
geoprocessing in VB scripting since I know that better from the start
and never had any problems with it.
And indeed the truckload of ArcObjects can be overwhelming.
david
They are really useful (working with MS access) until you get above
the 2GB size issue, then you need a new SQL platform (SQLserver/
Oracle).
Most of our users have steered away from Geodatabases for this reason.
esrispy
Also only one at a time can edit an accessDB so its not the best
choice db for storing huge datasets with frequent updates from several
people.
I think thats why they developed the new FileGDB in ArcGIS 9.2 which
is better for this purpose.
Regards/Martin
> > And indeed the truckload of ArcObjects can be overwhelming.- Dölj citerad text -
Karl
separately in v9.2. You now have to buy ArcGIS Server, which is
around US$25,000, depending on the version you buy.
Karl
Norm Shea
Norm Shea
Director, Lakes Management
Kiawah Island
Community Association Inc
20 Kestrel Court, Kiawah Island, SC
29455
Phone
843-768-2315 x 255 Fax
843-768-0298 Mobile
843-708-3608
Norm...@kica.us --- www.kica.us
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mapi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mayer, Mike
Sent: Friday, 24 Aug 2007 17:32
To: mapi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MI-L] MapInfo to ArcGIS Migration
SaintGIS
You will at the outset be faced with the geometry bottlenecks
depending on how rich the geometry and symbology is in MapInfo versus
whether you would be choosing Shape or Geodatabase or ArcSDE??
Shape file limits one geometry type per file unlike the heterogenous
geometry support in MapInfo.
Text is not going to be the same from MapInfo to Shape.
You will have them as points and then label them.
Well somtimes it is a decision not taken solely on the pros and cons
of migration but for the need of application functionality.
If you take this rather herculean task, you will need a Spatial ETL
tool like FME from Safe Software (http://www.safe.com)to carry out
this with ease and perfection.
Good Luck
Cheers
SRG
Marcus G
I've used Encounter 3.2, Exponaire 2.5, MapTV & ArcIMS 3.1 and 4.
When its up and running ArcIMS is sweet but to get it to that stage
takes T and $.
Where as Exponaire for example is intuitive to administer, less
installation woes, easy integration through data binds, reliable e.g
if a layer doesnt read. For most purposes (mid sized organisations) it
requires only a single web server to run.
OK I prefer ArcGIS to MapInfo but I prefer Exponaire to ArcIMS and GBM
Mobile to ArcPad. For this reason we have a site license for MapInfo
products & 1 floating copy of ArcGIS which will allow high end GIS
including an extension to our Hansen AMS. Sorted.
My opinion is ESRI software is powerful but often buggy and
cumbersome. MapInfo has an opportunity to become a good product but
following both ESRI example of what a professional GIS should be and
the mistakes of producing Microsoft like bloatware and forgetting how
users work & what tasks they perform repeatedly. In other words do it
the MapInfo way. Opening up reading of formats to DWG, DGN, shp etc is
good start....how about more functionality?
Marcus
> > > - Visa citerad text -- Hide quoted text -
Marcus G
I've used Encounter 3.2, Exponaire 2.5, MapTV & ArcIMS 3.1 and 4.
When its up and running ArcIMS is sweet but to get it to that stage
takes T and $.
Where as Exponaire for example is intuitive to administer, less
installation woes, easy integration through data binds, reliable e.g
if a layer doesnt read. For most purposes (mid sized organisations) it
requires only a single web server to run.
OK I prefer ArcGIS to MapInfo but I prefer Exponaire to ArcIMS and GBM
Mobile to ArcPad. For this reason we have a site license for MapInfo
products & 1 floating copy of ArcGIS which will allow high end GIS
including an extension to our Hansen AMS. Sorted.
My opinion is ESRI software is powerful but often buggy and
cumbersome. MapInfo has an opportunity to become a good product but
following both ESRI example of what a professional GIS should be and
the mistakes of producing Microsoft like bloatware and forgetting how
users work & what tasks they perform repeatedly. In other words do it
the MapInfo way. Opening up reading of formats to DWG, DGN, shp etc is
good start....how about more functionality?
Marcus
On Sep 14, 9:56 am, Karl <kkliparc...@mcelhanney.com> wrote: