Posts Tagged ‘geospatial’

Data Is to ESRI as Search Is to Google

Wednesday, March 10th, 2010

Do you remember the SAT exams?  These word games were always fun, so let’s play.

Google is not a web search company, but rather Google is an advertising company (they generated 97% of their revenues from advertising in 2009).  Search is the candy they give away to you so they can market advertising services.  Granted without search they have no advertising sales, so it is hard to separate Google from search.  But the point is that the company uses search as the marketing material to sell its products.

In previous posts (here and here), I have made the case that the mapping industry will change because players like Google and Microsoft (and Apple) will create mapping services embedded in their products as a feature enhancement.  The dollars that these companies are willing to spend on creating mapping products as features to their main business lines create “gravitational” distortions in the geospatial industry.  (For example TomTom stock is down ~60% since Google canceled its Tele Atlas contract in October 2009 and released its own turn-by-turn navigation system for mobile phones using the Android operating system. )

What was a bit unexpected was that other professional software companies would follow this free “Data-as-a-Feature” business model.  Yet this is exactly what ESRI has done.  Over the past couple of years, they bought a big piece of i-cubed to provide raster imagery products to their customers, and they have cut deals with data vendors, such as Microsoft Bing Maps, DeLorme, Tele Atlas, and others.  They have brought free data to light from federal agencies like USGS.  And they are combining these sources (with their stellar cartographic capabilities) to create derivative products that are extremely useful and appealing.

Just look at this topographic synthesis product from ArcGIS Online.  At the FedUC, Jack showed 1:1000 scale topographic data for selected cities within a worldwide map.  Nice and oh and by the way, it is free to users of ArcGIS Desktop products who maintain their license.

Data-as-a-Feature for ArcGIS Users

ESRI is a software company and generates most of its revenues via software sales and maintenance.  In fact, I’ve heard ESRI claim they have >90% of the core professional GIS market.  Data is the “new” free candy that ESRI gives away to maintain its market dominance in GIS software.  You have to admire the strategy to leverage their market dominance.  Data is a necessary “feature” for working in the GIS field.  Getting quality data, styled with beautiful cartography, as part of your content creation tool is a great benefit to users of that tool.

Software customers may be happy with data-as-a-feature; and anecdotal stories from GIS software integrators and solution providers suggest their customers are quite happy with the free regional products ESRI.  However, for independent data vendors it is a scary prospect.  If you produce regional or worldwide data, you can either sell your product to ESRI at “their” price, or face the prospect of losing access to their ecosystem of GIS developers by virtue of ESRI (re)creating the free product.

Life for independent data vendors has become more difficult.  On one hand they have to worry about Google, Microsoft, and Apple creating free worldwide data sets and applications to enhance their products.  Yet, I think these data vendors may have gotten used to this new paradigm and sought refuge in the “professional” data quality niche.  However, another hand is now in the picture (and in their till) with free professional data.  That hand is ESRI with its free Data-as-a-Feature.

Trust Jack

Tuesday, October 7th, 2008

I am not sure how many people in our industry are paying attention to the meltdown of the global financial services industry, but I want to point out the following interview with Jack Dangermond:

In it, Jack describes that growth of our industry as well as his expectations of ESRI:

ESRI has been growing annually at about 10-15% worldwide for many years, and in 2008 the company is growing at a rate of 17%, said Dangermond, adding that this “is counter intuitive to the whole stock market and economic downturn.”

In addition, he gives some thought to the differences between money capital and resource capital:

In terms of the global financial turmoil, Dangermond said “people today are very nervous about what is happening on Wall Street and what I am more concerned about is ecological sustainability and global warming issues on the planet, because they are not something that you can go to the bank and borrow more money from. The real sustainability issue and the real economic foundation is nature’s capital, it is not artificial money capital.”

Now, I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t see eye-to-eye with Jack on a lot of things. Money and intellectual capital are important for transitioning goods and services towards a more sustainable path. But for the most part, I think he is dead-on about the opportunities for our industry and the importance of our field.

Hang in there people, we’re in for a wild ride for the next 18-24 months. Keep your heads down, work hard, and keep pushing the envelope, and we will change the world.

Jack Dangermond, wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dangermond

It’s Not the GeoWeb, It’s Just the Web (and Maybe More)

Wednesday, July 30th, 2008

I am trying to synthesize my thoughts on the GeoWeb 2008 conference, as well as things that have been coming at us since the Safe Software press release. One of the thoughts that continues to rise to the surface is that the GeoWeb is not an independent section of the internet, but rather a niche location in the web; a niche section that perhaps is being rolled into its core.

I think I heard a similar statement from Ron Lake at the GeoWeb conference (“The GeoWeb is the Internet”). James Fee has picked up the theme in a recent post. The comments to that post seem to have echoes of the neogeography vs. GIS clashes. Yet, there does not appear to be any of the vitriol associated with this thread compared to past debates. Maybe we are moving past the divisions and into the realm of synergy between the different focuses of the groups.

And then bang, you see an announcement by ESRI and Microsoft Virtual Earth offering Virtual Earth products inside ArcGIS Server. Talk about a fusion of GIS and neogeography. You will have to purchase a Virtual Earth license, so it fits within Microsoft’s tradition licensing revenue model, but still, Virtual Earth is more about the future of yellow pages advertising than about GIS or GeoWeb services. At least according to Microsoft’s Vincent Tao at the Location Intelligence 2008 conference.

So where do we go from here? The internet is “evolving”. It started out as a robust means of communicating and sharing supercomputer resources (see ARPANET). It has become a ubiquitous communication, processing, and storage array that touches nearly every aspect of our daily lives. In its evolution to date, it has rolled through many businesses (e.g. telecommunication, financial, advertising, etc.), upending their business models, to create new services, products, and business opportunities. I think the spatial industry is just the next industry to overwhelmed (shaken? stirred? smashed?) by the evolution of this omnipresent technology in our lives.

Location awareness is just the next information stream to be absorbed by the massive data ingestion services that reside within the internet. If you own a mobile phone, your position on the planet is already trackable to within meters (see Enhanced 911). New business models are started daily on using these feeds as new Location-Based Services (LBS). As a consumer, geo-spam is a concern, but you can always turn-off the buzzer. But new models built on real-time crowd dynamics or “mobbing” offer a whole new approach to targeted marketing and advertising (see Peter Batty’s presentation at GeoWeb as an example).

Would you have seen this coming 10 years ago? It’s clear Microsoft did not see Google coming, and they had some very smart people trying to predict the future. I think we in the spatial data industry are facing the fertile grounds that lead to similar revolutionary technologies. Such environments lead to the classic innovator’s dilemma for business organizations – how do we maintain our current revenue stream, while creating new, faster growing opportunities so that we do not end up as the last maker of horse drawn carriages?

Who Owns Your Geo-Knowledge?

Monday, July 21st, 2008

I read with interest today that the B.C. Government’s deal with Google to turn over its entire geographic database to Google (see also the AnyThing Geo Blog). From the Vancouver Sun -

On Friday, Agriculture and Lands Minister Stan Hagen announced GeoBC, a government organization, will provide 24/7 access to the province’s geographic database in partnership with Google. This information will be available online at geobc.gov.bc.ca and from Google Earth.

This is a great opportunity for the government to disseminate its geo-content through another portal. The deal allows the BC government to follow its mission to best serve the public that originally paid for the geo-content.

However, if you review what is happening in Hollywood with respect to writers and actors demands for a greater share of the digital reviews from marketing their products through non-traditional portals, i.e. the Internet, I believe that there may be storm clouds on the horizons for geo-content producers.

For Google, it is a great way to get content with which to build the LBS business that will eventually sell advertising. Yet in its traditional business, Google pays referral fees to content providers for other types of content, such as blogs, using Adsense. It is unknown whether they are paying anything to the BC government, but the geo-content creators will receive nothing.

One could argue that the geo-content creators have already been paid. But this is the same argument used by the studios in the writers strike. I think that this may be a future issue for our field.

Safe Software and WeoGeo Partnership

Friday, July 18th, 2008

The facts of this partnership are well covered by the press release and Directions Magazine’s coverage (see Adena Schutzberg’s article and podcast). I thought I would give a bit more of the why.

1) ETL is fundamental to the needs of our customer base.
2) Safe is the best at spatial ETL.
3) People trust Safe for ETL.
4) If you use CAD or GIS software, there is a good chance you use Safe Software.

For a marketplace to be successful, its players have to trust their interactions and delivery mechanisms. Safe operates on over 200 different file formats across multiple platforms. Bringing this type of technology to our users is critical to our success; bringing Safe to our customers is just good sense.

What does Safe get out of this? We give them the cloud for FME Server and provide their users with the path to the future of web infrastructure.

Together, we get to focus on our strengths and bring new tools to bear on our respective businesses.

I am excited about our opportunities and the impacts I believe we will have on the spatial industry.

Some Thoughts on Mechanical Turk and Geo-Processing

Wednesday, July 16th, 2008

We use Amazon Web Services (AWS) quite a bit. Mostly we use the EC2 and S3, but recently we have been using a limited bit of Mechanical Turk (MTurk) for some testing of the web site.

For those of you who don’t know what MTurk is, from the web site -

…The Mechanical Turk web service enables companies to programmatically access this marketplace and a diverse, on-demand workforce. Developers can leverage this service to build human intelligence directly into their applications.

Our use has been somewhat limited to testing of the web site only. However, there has been some image processing uses of MTurk, including the SAR efforts to find Jim Gray and Steve Fossett.

I wear two hats these days. We are still actively involved in the development of HyperSpectral Imaging (HSI) sensors and algorithms (see the Florida Environmental Research Institute). It was from these efforts that we developed the cataloging, discovery, and distribution systems that we spun out into WeoGeo.

The holy grail of imaging techniques is the automatic extraction of features and classification of materials within the raster data. It is something we have been trying to develop for over a decade. There are others who have been working at it longer.

After all these years, there are some problems that are still difficult to solve in processing imagery. They frequently require just looking at the images frame by frame to resolve features and classify stuff that just defies algorithmic development. It strikes me that there may be some parts of this processing that may not be easily solved using computer algorithms. Things like finding seam lines in overlapping aerial photographs.

Several major imaging vendors send a chunk of their current image processing to low cost countries like China and India to complete their large-scale projects. It seems that there might be a better way to accomplish such geo-processing tasks that still require eyes then to incur the time and expense of sending these tasks overseas. Perhaps Mturk and some smart programming might offer a different approach.

I also wonder what other sort of QC/QA tasks in geo-processing might be solved by MTurk. I might try to kick it around a bit at GeoWeb. Find me if you got some thoughts.

(Ford assembly line, 1913)

Innovation in Web Mapping Systems

Thursday, January 10th, 2008

There is a nice discussion happening on James Fee’s Blog about Web Mapping Systems and Services and the future of hosted mapping services. I was reading it and thought back to an interesting Wall Street Journal article on Monday about Circuit City that said same store sales in December fell by 12% in the US. While this news was depressing for the stock market, the silver lining for the geo-community was that navigational products were the only product line with increasing sales over the period.

Geo-devices are becoming more ubiquitous. The shear number of curious and talented people moving into our industry combined with these devices will drive product and service innovation in directions that may not be completely clear at the moment.

Converging with the mass market penetration of geo-devices and geo-content (geoware?) is the cloud computing efforts by AWS (and soon to be others). While the production of quality mapping today may require high end desktop workstations and servers, I think that Moore’s Law is eventually going to allow our field to produce geo-content and services far more easily, leading to a feedback into future product innovation. How we in the professional community create products and services today may be radically different in the future.

I offer this anecdote – today, after 10 years of running a Microsoft Exchange Server for our email requirements, we switched to Google Mail Premium. Over the 10 year period, we incurred costs of $10,000s, possibly greater than $100,000. These costs included licensing, hardware, server room, service personnel, etc. Our spam filter alone on the MSFT Exchange Server costs us $35 per year per mailbox. Our costs for Google Mail Premium service is $50 a mailbox per year. It is an easier to use, cheaper to implement, and offers more robust service than the Exchange product.

I think there might be parallels for our industry in this anecdote. It is probably a good exercise to be thinking about what products might be replacing the ones we are using today.

The future of GIS, geo-content, geo-entertainment, etc. will belong to those who can think outside of the traditional methods of production and product delivery. For historical evidence of the difference between companies that focus on the future and those that focus on their current narrow niche, look at the change in market capitalization of Trimble (TRMB) and Garmin (GRMN) over the last decade.

Above Chart taken from Google Finance

WeoGeo’s Mapping Marketplace Makes Final Cut in Amazon’s Start-Up Challenge

Wednesday, November 21st, 2007

The only thing I can say is, “Wow!” Followed by the biggest grin you have ever seen on my face. As one of 7 finalists, Amazon expresses their confidence in our technology and business strategy. In all honesty, I am humbled and honored by the selection, and truly thank them for their selection of us as one of the 7 finalists.

I believe (passionately) in what we are trying to create. I believe that WeoGeo will change the paradigm in how we discover and access geo-content. I believe that we (the geospatial industry) as a community will more easily synthesize new mapping products that will help us create a better world. But these are my beliefs, and I tend to view everything we do through these rose colored glasses.

The selection as a finalist by Amazon Web Services (AWS) means that someone else out there sees the same potential for the mapping and geo-content industry as we do. It provides validation for the people who have worked so hard on this project beyond anything that I could offer, and for this I am eternally grateful.

In addition, Amazon will offer the winner of this contest a venture investment. I believe this says a lot about the geospatial industry, as well as WeoGeo. For WeoGeo to be among those considered a suitable investment opportunity by a $32 billion dollar company, we must have (1) a great business plan, (2) a great set of technology, and (3) be in an industry with high growth potential. Our industry, the geospatial industry, is now recognized by a leader in internet services industry as having high growth potential.

I’ve been grinning so much, my face hurts…

Profiting From Collective Intelligence

Wednesday, October 10th, 2007

I have had a number of questions from our private beta Providers that basically ask, “What maps should I be making?” To be honest, I wish I knew. In reality, WeoGeo Market was established to answer this very question.

We set up WeoGeo to lower the risks of creating and selling mapping products (most importantly by reducing marketing and transaction costs). We believe that by lowering the risk of creating and selling geo-content, more products could be created at lower prices. By combining more products at lower prices with a greater ability to find and customize those products, Users of those products would be more apt to purchase more geo-content. The overall goal is to create a truly functioning marketplace for geo-content. The end result would be a collective intelligence expressed through the market that would help all of us focus on making the most valuable geospatial products.

Answering the question of what product to create is one of the hardest parts of running FERI’s operations. While FERI is a research and development organization, we still had to perform the basic sales and marketing efforts of finding paying customers to support our development of value-added mapping products. It is a very time consuming and difficult process, requiring a lot of telephone calls and a lot of travel to search out programs that would value our imaging and mapping efforts. Such is the nature of sales and marketing, and every good salesman would tell you that is just the way you have to generate business.

However, as a scientist I want to focus on the generation of new mapping products. While I could (and still do) focus on sales and marketing, my real interest is in generating new mapping products that could help people make decisions with their resources or help save lives. With the hyperspectral imagery, we could develop maps focused on a variety of topics. These maps could range from Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs or more commonly called red tides) to Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) to detecting probable locations of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). Yet, finding sufficient demand for these products to overcome the high initial production cost of creating these products is difficult. (I have a whole other story on the IEDs and how the DoD does business with contractors and appropriation earmarks that I’ll save for another time.)

Over the years, we have watched with great interest how the internet has impacted other businesses. One of the most interesting impacts that we have seen is the rise of shared intelligence from the accumulation of individual choices. For example, search engines have used the individual linkages of web page creators to develop a collective intelligence estimate of the most likely desired result for a search term (and a new industry of search engine optimization). In particular, we were fascinated by eBay’s ability to enable millions of people to develop larger markets for their niche products.

By establishing a functioning marketplace for these niche goods, eBay created liquidity and demand for products that previously had limited marketability. In the process of creating a market whose niches could be efficiently filled, they also provided opportunities for entrepreneurs to develop new markets. In effect, eBay created a platform that enabled individuals to make choices, create products, and satisfy the needs of others, which in turn created a positive feedback mechanism for everyone who participated. This led to the creation of whole businesses that did not exist prior to eBay, and the rise of the valuation of goods that previously had limited market enetration, and thus, underdetermined recognized value.

The increased liquidity of products and the collective actions of many individuals led to a self-sustaining marketplace that enriches all of the participants. eBay is a lesson in economic theory, and gives truth to the concept that “a rising tide lifts all boats.”

So what does this have to do with answering the question from our Providers about which maps to produce? The answer to that question is that I am not sure, but I can make sure that the Provider’s risk is low enough for them to make some reasonable choices, and to give them the agility to respond to market demands. Through this process, I believe that our collective intelligence will point Providers in the most profitable direction.

This marketplace will give those with the skills and those with the content the ability to connect as never before possible. The new network of connections will lead to the creation of new geo-content that will enhance and enrich the lives of our community. And our community will profit from it because we will know which maps to make.

Follow-Up to Direction Magazine’s Podcast on WeoGeo

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007

Adena Schutzberg did a podcast with me last week on the business model for WeoGeo. It was my first podcast and I hope that I made sense to people (I welcome comments and/or critiques in the comments section here). I would like to thank Adena for giving us the opportunity to tell our story.

However, I am not sure I was as clear as I could have been about our history and the importance that history in the development of WeoGeo. I could not quite put my finger on what was missing until after the AWS StartUp Event – Boston (see here as well for my comments) when someone asked how many man-years of effort went into developing the site.

My first response was to take the number of years that FERI was in operation times the number of people involved at FERI. Kind of silly, I know. But when I think of why we built WeoGeo, this response seems relevant. Their response, of course, was, “no really, how much technical development time?” I understood the question; the person was trying to ascertain how difficult it would be to recreate what we are doing.

Our technical development on this project did start back around 2001 with a project called Hyperspectral Data Repository On-line (HyDRO). This was our first distribution system, developed to help alleviate the problems associated in delivering HSI data to our customers. This concept and technology eventually evolved into the WeoGeo Server (see post here as well). Between 2001 and 2005 we had 4 PhDs and masters-trained personal spending a portion of their time on HyDRO because it was a critical element of our research programs. In the last couple of years, we increased the number of people working on WeoGeo Market/Server, to >12 currently if you include outside contractors. For the most part, they are highly trained GIS and MIS/CIS/CS personnel.

The technology is hot, no question about it. I am amazed on a daily basis what our group of people has developed for mapping on both commodity computers and utility computing systems. Yet, here is the rub to this type of man-years calculation. I really believe that the reasons for WeoGeo, and its associated development time, stem from our history at FERI, which makes such calculations difficult. The “technical development time” is not just time spent coding; it includes the needs assessment and the development of the system architecture to address critical problems and/or pain. What we have developed at WeoGeo is a direct function of two critical needs of our operations as a research and imagery services organization.

These two critical needs were (and still are):
1) Delivery of our survey grade, high volume mapping content;
2) Finding and acquiring other survey grade mapping content to fuse with ours to create value-added geocontent for our clients.

WeoGeo was built to solve these two critical problems (there are others, but not nearly as critical to our organization as these). If you have never been faced with these problems, then you might not appreciate the depth of the solutions we have built to service these needs (and its potential). But if you have, then you have felt our pain – and I hope value our solution.