Mapinfo V ArcGIS
James Cameron
I know this one has probably been done to death, I was just wondering what functionality MapInfo has that ArcGIS does not?
Thanks Jim Cameron
Uffe Kousgaard
But one thing is access to spatial DBMS's out of the box. Oracle Spatial, PostGIS etc. Not just read access, but also write access.
Regards
Uffe Kousgaard
James Cameron wrote:
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "MapInfo-L" group.To post a message to this group, send
email to mapi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, go to:
http://groups.google.com/group/mapinfo-l/subscribe?hl=en
For more options, information and links to MapInfo resources (searching
archives, feature requests, to visit our Wiki, visit the Welcome page at
http://groups.google.com/group/mapinfo-l?hl=en
Tim Rideout
Dr Tim Rideout
Director
XYZ Win Awards - At the International Map Trade Show in Italy on Feb 18th, the National Geographic map of Scotland won the Silver Award for Best Flat Map (made by XYZ from People's Map data), and at the British Cartographic Society on June 9th 2011 our National Geographic Ireland map won Commended in the Stanfords Award for Best Printed Map 2011, and the Global Mapping Environmental World won the BCS Best Map of 2011. Visit XYZ at the Frankfurt Book Fair 12th-16th Oct.
The XYZ Digital Map Company
Unit
9-11 Hardengreen Bus.Pk.
Dalhousie Road,
Dalkeith,
EH22
3NX
Tele: +44 (0) 131 454 0426
Mobile: +44 (0) 7766
825937
Fax: +44 131 454 0443
Email: tim.r...@xyzmaps.com
Web:
www.xyzmaps.com
Peter Doyle
Tim,
You can download my GEScene tool from here
http://www.directionsmag.com/files/view/gescene-current-version/139517
Regards
Peter Doyle
mark909
that mapinfo does not?
Out of the package arcgis has a lot more functionality than the basic
mapinfo package.
What type of things are you trying to acheive? I prefer mapinfo for
data entry, digitization and getting data into a useable format.
Arcgis is better for spatial analysis. They both have advantages and
disadvantages depending on what you're trying to acheive.
On Oct 13, 9:48 am, James Cameron <james.came...@fusiongis.com.au>
wrote:
>
> Thanks Jim Cameron
>
>
> image001.jpg
> 24KViewDownload
nestor olfindo
Uffe Kousgaard
In my mind ArcView is well-known for not offering very much out of the
box. Many of the analysis options are added in ArcEditor / ArcInfo or in
one the many extensions. Those have a completely different price level
than MapInfo Pro.
Regards
Uffe Kousgaard
Tim Rideout
Dr Tim Rideout
Director
XYZ Win Awards - At the International Map Trade Show in Italy on Feb 18th, the National Geographic map of Scotland won the Silver Award for Best Flat Map (made by XYZ from People's Map data), and at the British Cartographic Society on June 9th 2011 our National Geographic Ireland map won Commended in the Stanfords Award for Best Printed Map 2011, and the Global Mapping Environmental World won the BCS Best Map of 2011. Visit XYZ at the Frankfurt Book Fair 12th-16th Oct.
The XYZ Digital Map Company
Unit
9-11 Hardengreen Bus.Pk.
Dalhousie Road,
Dalkeith,
EH22
3NX
Tele: +44 (0) 131 454 0426
Mobile: +44 (0) 7766
825937
Fax: +44 131 454 0443
Email: tim.r...@xyzmaps.com
Web:
www.xyzmaps.com
From: mapi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mapi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of nestor olfindo
Sent: 14 October 2011 10:32
To: mapi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MI-L] Re: Mapinfo V ArcGIS
GeoGRAFX
Target and MapInfo/Discover platforms. The client is currently using
AutoCAD. The client is Vancouver based with offices in Mexico and
consultants living in the US, so some of this may not apply to the
European or Australian readers. I'm including the relevant points for
comparing ArcView to MapInfo:
COST:
The problem is that with ArcView (now called ArcGIS) you only get a
viewer, while MapInfo is a pretty full blown GIS system. To enable
ArcGIS to have the same capabilities you are talking in the $15K+
price range. For example to add true editing capabilities to ArcGIS,
you need ArcEditor – at a cost of $7500. Oh, and you need to create
grids in Arc, so that’s another add on at $2500, and the list goes on.
TRAINING:
Arc is taught at the university level – and you do need advanced
training to use the program well, not the 2 day courses we offer for
MapInfo, so while people may have the training in school, if I’m
working with someone who has no experience, it’s much easier to get
them up to speed on MapInfo. It's easier to find people trained in
Arc than in MapInfo.
BEHIND THE SCENES:
Arc allows only one projection in a window – MapInfo reprojects on the
fly – this is great when working with several projections as is common
in Mexico. The cavaet is that you need to know the projection of the
Map Window for the output.
Arc is quite structured in its data requirements – MapInfo doesn’t
care, it will take the data anyway you have it. There are plusses and
minuses to this approach, as if you are disorganized MapInfo doesn’t
care, If you are organized either system works great. Personally I
like the organization of Arc. ArcGIS has Arc Catalog, where a user
can view data, change projections of feature classes, and create a
geodatabases to organize data into spatially referenced feature
classes, and raster datatsets.
Opening .mxd vs .wor files. Arc is much kinder in opening .mxd files
– if files are missing, it will still open the .mxd file and allow you
to search for the missing data files. Workspaces, are not so friendly
– if it can’t find the files, it won’t open. Conversely, it’s much
easier to package files to send to people in MapInfo than in Arc.
When digitizing, Arc does a decent job, you can trace lines, snap to
nodes, however, it will cost to get more editing tools by upgrading to
ArcEditor or ArcInfo. Mapinfo/Discover simplifies the digitizing
process, which is easier to use than Arc and allows for easy
conversion of objects to polylines or polygons, or editing, and again
contains all the necessary functions.
Arc requires similar object types in a layer - you can not mix points,
lines, text, regions in one layer.
In Arc Rasters can be georeferenced, though this is not always
necessary, if they don’t contain any spatial reference or
coordinates.
DATA:
There is more data available in Arc formats than MapInfo. Conversion
programs read in the objects and attributes. Neither system will read
in symbology (colors, linestyles) from the other system, so that’s
something to be aware of.
Arc has more functionality than Mapinfo when it comes to connecting to
a server, such as a IMS, WCS, ArcGIS, or WMS server. ArcGIS has the
added function of being able to connect to government data (BLM’s
PLSS, USGS), and other servers(ArcGIS online) that offer base maps and
layers that can be useful to geologists.
SUPPORT:
MapInfo: Support is adequate for MapInfo issues
ESRI: Their support has always been good, and they now have a geo
division so at least they know what we’re talking about.
OUTPUT QUALITY:
Arc takes this hands down. They have invested in matching colors,
styles, gradational shading, callouts – all things that make for a
quality presentation. In MapInfo, I actually use some of the Arc
tools to create nice output. For investor presentation, MapPublisher
will read either type of files, it will now read .mxd files directly,
and has plans to read .wor files as well.
In Arc the layout view is much better than mapinfo, for instance there
are two views, one for layout, and one for the map(data view).
Instead of having 10 different windows open in mapinfo, Arc can
organize everything into layers in a table of contents, and only one
window shows at a time when a layer is activated, unless a table
window is open. A user can specify a fixed scale for both map and
layout, which will not change when moving the map. For the scale bars
in Arc a user has to specify the length, units and numbers, and there
are lots more choices, though Discover will automatically place a
scale bar in the layout when specified. Legend editor is better in
Arc as you can specify exactly what you want in the legend and
manipulate the positions of objects, or delete irrelevant material. A
user can also insert pictures without having to register them, and
size them accordingly.
So, my bottom line – for a company that is cost conscious, that
doesn’t have an in-house GIS department, and an IT department, whose
geos are expected to multi-task the MapInfo/Discover platform is a
much better solution. Either solution is MUCH better than using
AutoCAD.
Can you think of anything I’ve missed?
Best Regards,
Barbara Carroll, CPG
________________________________________________________
GeoGRAFX GIS Services
Management, Analysis and Presentation of Geologic Data
1760 E River Rd, Suite 115 • Tucson, AZ 85718
phone: 520 744-4457 fax: 520 744-3066
www.geografxworld.com
On Oct 13, 1:48 am, James Cameron <james.came...@fusiongis.com.au>
wrote:
>
> Thanks Jim Cameron
>
>
> image001.jpg
> 24KViewDownload
Uffe Kousgaard
MapInfo workspaces are text files, making it easy to edit them, if
needed. MXD documents are binary > Black box.
MapInfo will save a workspace in the oldest possible version number,
compared to the features in use. That makes it easy to share workspaces
between different users. ArcGIS MXD documents are not backwards
compatible. An ArcGIS 10 MXD document can not be opened in ArcGIS 9.x
(but v10 will update v9 documents).
In a similar way we can still compile mapbasic applications using very
old mapbasic compilers and it will most likely run on recent versions of
MapInfo. With ArcGIS there has been significant changes between every
major version, making it "expensive" to support multiple versions from a
single code base.
You can have multiple versions of MapInfo installed if you like to.
ArcGIS only allows one.
Regards
Uffe Kousgaard
GeoGRAFX wrote:
> Can you think of anything I�ve missed?
>
> Best Regards,
> Barbara Carroll, CPG
> ________________________________________________________
> GeoGRAFX GIS Services
> Management, Analysis and Presentation of Geologic Data
> 1760 E River Rd, Suite 115 � Tucson, AZ 85718
Seb
Hi,
We use both platforms, as well as others.
On the cost issue, the equivalent Arcgis to Mapinfo is arcmap, which is somewhere around £1700, like Mapinfo there are paid for and free extensions and scripts, some of the Esri extensions can be expensive, but some third party ones such ETgeowizards are very cheap and powerful,sub £200 off the top of my head, http://www.ian-ko.com/ET_GeoWizards/gw_main.htm. Data driven pages, the photo import tools and coding in python are just some examples of things we find very useful that arc comes with. Loading data with different projections is not an issue, but I believe that it only lets you edit data with the same projection as the view, not hard to change in any case.
A current favourite is the file geodatabase format, super large vector file formats that are very fast to use, locally as well as over a network. Easy to use and create.
For personal use you can acquire the full Arc with all the extensions for £100.
The above gives you all the same editing functionality that you would need in everyday GIS with a lot of editing tools. From having used both, Arcmap has more tools, Mapinfo slighly more straightforward.
If I get the chance I will add some further comments.
Cheers
Seb
kitex
http://www.sgsi.com/MIUserGroup/Why_MI.htm
On Oct 15, 6:14 pm, Seb <sebhud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We use both platforms, as well as others.
>
> On the cost issue, the equivalent Arcgis to Mapinfo is arcmap, which is
> somewhere around £1700, like Mapinfo there are paid for and free extensions
> and scripts, some of the Esri extensions can be expensive, but some third
> party ones such ETgeowizards are very cheap and powerful,sub £200 off the
> things we find very useful that arc comes with. Loading data with different
> projections is not an issue, but I believe that it only lets you edit data
> with the same projection as the view, not hard to change in any case.
>
> A current favourite is the file geodatabase format, super large vector file
> formats that are very fast to use, locally as well as over a network. Easy
> to use and create.
>
> For personal use you can acquire the full Arc with all the extensions for
> £100.
>
> The above gives you all the same editing functionality that you would need
> in everyday GIS with a lot of editing tools. From having used both, Arcmap
> has more tools, Mapinfo slighly more straightforward.
>
> If I get the chance I will add some further comments.
>
> Cheers
>
> Seb
Uffe Kousgaard
(v2 ?)
Must be from around 1996. A remarkable year btw, since that's when I
started on the first parts of what later became RouteWare :-)
Regards
Uffe Kousgaard
kitex
Uffe Kousgaard
text has absolutely nothing to do with todays ArcGIS.
You can read about the old arcview here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArcView_3.x