Hi All,

It would be nice to say that we had chance to do a full cost, benefit analysis 
for moving over to open source, but we weren't really given that much notice 
about the change in license. In a way we don't have a choice about doing this, 
so either we find products that work for us or we change our workflow to make 
them work! 

Luckily because we had been broadly considering a move to open source software 
across the board, we had taken on computing staff who were familiar with open 
source products in general, and some intimately familiar with particular gis 
packages. Support and maintenance should not be too much of a problem- and in 
fact we are now able to offer support and advice for other 
companies/individuals also considering this transition, as well as providing 
the portable GIS package, that gives them the chance to try out some of the 
alternatives without needing to install them.

In terms of what we need the software to do- we do the full suite of tasks from 
basic processing of data through to full spatial and 3D analysis, with a wide 
range of data formats. As a quick point to Percy- the sextante plugin for GvSIG 
contains many more features in those areas than the corresponding ArcGIS 
extensions, and of course if you use QGIS you get the grass plugin. So, off the 
top of my head:

Spatial and tabular joins- check (gvsig), cad integration for survey plans- 
check (gvsig), 3D and spatial analysis- check (both qgis and gvsig with grass 
and sextante plugins respectively), postgis integration - check (both). 

As I mentioned- the main area that we find all the open source products lacking 
slightly is in the generation of finely controlled (ie where the end user can 
easily control the appearance of every element) illustrations. In the past, 
with ArcGIS, the end-user could generate their own illustrations without 
needing the support of a dedicated graphics person, and we don't really want to 
go down a route where that changes. This is the only real area where we're at 
all concerned about the transition so we're working on ways to address this. 

In terms of transitioning existing projects from ArcGIS to open source- we have 
found a plugin that converts mxds to other formats (mapserver, arcinfo etc) and 
as it's all xml based we are looking at extending it to work with gvsig and 
qgis projects too. In this way we hope to move people over without the need for 
them to completely rebuild their work in the new packages. 

Hope this all helps, and if you need any further information then do ask

Jo
-----------------------------------------------------
Joanne Cook
Information Systems Coordinator
Oxford Archaeology (North)
01524 880212
http://thehumanjourney.net




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 07:10:38 +1000
From: Cameron Shorter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Joanne,
I'm very excited to hear about your experience and am keen to hear more.
My immediate need is to put together a strong argument by mid next week 
for a techie to present to upper management.

Longer term, I'd love to see a case study we can add to 
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Case_Studies . I expect your case study will 
be widely read as this will be a common issue organisations face now 
that ESRI have stopped support for Arc View 3.1.

So anything you can quickly flick me would be great. Do you have a user 
needs assessment? A feature by feature comparison? Or anything similar 
along those lines. A cost, benefit analysis?

How are you planning to address maintenance and support of the Open 
Source products?

Longer term, compiling into a case study would be good. I'm happy to 
review and provide feedback if that helps.

Joanne Cook wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
>
> We (Oxford Archaeology) are going through exactly that process at the moment, 
> although we are replacing arcgis 9.2 rather than arcview. We are doing this 
> primarily because changes in the licensing terms meant that we were no longer 
> eligible for the educational discount, but it's part of a longer term move 
> towards open source. We have spent some time investigating alternatives, and 
> have a few contenders, and I'm sure we would be happy to advise, or provide a 
> case study on this. 
>
> Basically we are looking at gvsig and qgis as the main options- gvsig because 
> it can use cad data, and qgis because we like the grass integration and it's 
> slightly more user-friendly for english speakers (the translated version of 
> gvsig still has some spanish bits in it). With slight changes to our 
> work-flows, we are finding that these two packages will do almost everything 
> we need a gis to do, with the exception of producing high-quality 
> illustrations. To achieve this we are currently looking at export to svg or 
> postscript for final editing in inkscape, but that's a work in progress.
>
> Contact me (off-list or on) if you would like some more information on this 
> transition.
>
> All the best
>
> Jo
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Joanne Cook
> Information Systems Coordinator
> Oxford Archaeology (North)
> 01524 880212
> http://thehumanjourney.net
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:28:57 +1000
> From: Cameron Shorter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
> To: Miguel Montesinos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>       [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Some Australian organisations are considering replacing their ArcView 
> 3.1 desktops with an Open Source alternative.
>
> Is anyone aware of others who have gone through this process?
> If so, who are they?
> Do they have a case study?
> I'm particularly interested to see a review of ArcView features used by 
> oganisation users, and compared against Open Source to see if the Open 
> Source covered their requirements.
>
> I'm aware of this good review of Open Source Desktop clients at: 
> http://www.spatialserver.net/osgis/
>
>   


-- 
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Systems Architect
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Commercial Support for Geospatial Open Source Solutions
http://www.lisasoft.com/LISAsoft/SupportedProducts.html



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:15:46 -0700
From: percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

I think the key here is to discuss the Extensions to Arcview and Arcmap. 
Much of the base functionality can be covered by these FOSS desktop 
clients like gvSIG and QGIS and UDIG, but extensions like Spatial 
analyst and 3D analyst, for some of us, is where it becomes difficult to 
our work done using only FOSS.

Plus simple stuff like spatial joins.
:-)

I teach a class called GIS for the Natural Sciences every year, and 
because of industry standards and educational discounts the primary 
platform is ESRI. I always mention FOSS alternatives though.

This year, after I gave out the first assignment, I decided to try to do 
it myself using only FOSS software.
Fired up QGIS, no spatial join. The only way to move forward was to fire 
up PostGIS, command line.
That was the end of the experiment in terms of trying to rewrite the 
assignment using opensource desktop gis.
:-(
Percy

Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Joanne,
> I'm very excited to hear about your experience and am keen to hear more.
> My immediate need is to put together a strong argument by mid next week 
> for a techie to present to upper management.
> 
> Longer term, I'd love to see a case study we can add to 
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Case_Studies . I expect your case study will 
> be widely read as this will be a common issue organisations face now 
> that ESRI have stopped support for Arc View 3.1.
> 
> So anything you can quickly flick me would be great. Do you have a user 
> needs assessment? A feature by feature comparison? Or anything similar 
> along those lines. A cost, benefit analysis?
> 
> How are you planning to address maintenance and support of the Open 
> Source products?
> 
> Longer term, compiling into a case study would be good. I'm happy to 
> review and provide feedback if that helps.
> 
> Joanne Cook wrote:
>> Hi Cameron,
>>
>> We (Oxford Archaeology) are going through exactly that process at the 
>> moment, although we are replacing arcgis 9.2 rather than arcview. We 
>> are doing this primarily because changes in the licensing terms meant 
>> that we were no longer eligible for the educational discount, but it's 
>> part of a longer term move towards open source. We have spent some 
>> time investigating alternatives, and have a few contenders, and I'm 
>> sure we would be happy to advise, or provide a case study on this.
>> Basically we are looking at gvsig and qgis as the main options- gvsig 
>> because it can use cad data, and qgis because we like the grass 
>> integration and it's slightly more user-friendly for english speakers 
>> (the translated version of gvsig still has some spanish bits in it). 
>> With slight changes to our work-flows, we are finding that these two 
>> packages will do almost everything we need a gis to do, with the 
>> exception of producing high-quality illustrations. To achieve this we 
>> are currently looking at export to svg or postscript for final editing 
>> in inkscape, but that's a work in progress.
>>
>> Contact me (off-list or on) if you would like some more information on 
>> this transition.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> Joanne Cook
>> Information Systems Coordinator
>> Oxford Archaeology (North)
>> 01524 880212
>> http://thehumanjourney.net
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:28:57 +1000
>> From: Cameron Shorter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
>> To: Miguel Montesinos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>     [email protected]
>> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Some Australian organisations are considering replacing their ArcView 
>> 3.1 desktops with an Open Source alternative.
>>
>> Is anyone aware of others who have gone through this process?
>> If so, who are they?
>> Do they have a case study?
>> I'm particularly interested to see a review of ArcView features used 
>> by oganisation users, and compared against Open Source to see if the 
>> Open Source covered their requirements.
>>
>> I'm aware of this good review of Open Source Desktop clients at: 
>> http://www.spatialserver.net/osgis/
>>
>>   
> 
> 

-- 
David Percy
Geospatial Data Manager
Geology Department
Portland State University
http://gisgeek.pdx.edu
503-725-3373


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:41:20 +0100
From: Andrew Larcombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
To: [email protected]
Message-ID:
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed


On 18 Apr 2008, at 23:15, percy wrote:

> I think the key here is to discuss the Extensions to Arcview and  
> Arcmap. Much of the base functionality can be covered by these FOSS  
> desktop clients like gvSIG and QGIS and UDIG, but extensions like  
> Spatial analyst and 3D analyst, for some of us, is where it becomes  
> difficult to our work done using only FOSS.

+1. Talk of 'replacing ArcGIS' in broadbrush terms is IMO the wrong  
approach. Certainly much of the viewing and simple analytical tools  
can be replaced straight off by QGIS, more advanced stuff by GRASS,  
some by PostGIS/OGR/GDAL/Mapserver or a combination of all of these.  
There's no drop-in replacement for ArcGIS per-se but if not all, then  
most, of its functionality can be handled by FOSS. Maybe a functional- 
based ArcView replacement howto might be in order?

Cheers,

A
-- 
Andrew Larcombe
Freelance Geospatial, Database & Web Programming

web: http://www.andrewlarcombe.co.uk
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
icq: 306690163






------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:12:13 -0500
From: Howard Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes


On Apr 18, 2008, at 5:15 PM, percy wrote:

> I think the key here is to discuss the Extensions to Arcview and  
> Arcmap. Much of the base functionality can be covered by these FOSS  
> desktop clients like gvSIG and QGIS and UDIG, but extensions like  
> Spatial analyst and 3D analyst, for some of us, is where it becomes  
> difficult to our work done using only FOSS.

I think a key component would be an open source interpreter for Avenue  
implemented for either QGIS, uDig, or gvSIG.  It wouldn't need to be  
complete parity with what ArcView 3.x had, but if it were at least an  
80/20 solution, folks with scripts and utilities that they're using  
for basic data manipulation and simple analysis would have an upgrade  
path.

ESRI abandoned lots of smalltime developers when they moved from  
ArcView 3.x to ArcGIS and didn't bring the Avenue folks along for the  
ride.  Rather than face the migration cost of rewriting all of their  
Avenue code, they're just sitting there hoping things will continue to  
work unsupported for a while.  ESRI's not going to bring Avenue  
forward -- they've moved on to .NET and COM Python wrappers -- and I  
think there's a significant audience of analysis-oriented folks that  
were left behind.  If the open source world gave these folks a  
potential migration path, it might generate enough interest and  
funding to bootstrap it.

Alternatively, if ESRI wanted to totally fluster the open source  
desktop market, they could GPL ArcView (the pieces of it they own and  
could actually license) and let all of us freetards froth over it for  
two or three years trying to beat it into some kind of shape.  By the  
time we actually get it to work, they'll probably be end-of-life'ing  
ArcGIS and on to the next thing...

Howard


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:39:05 -0600
From: "Eric Wolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] ArcView 3.1 replacement
To: [email protected]
Message-ID:
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

I've always thought that GPL'ing ArcView would be both an outstanding and
astounding move by ESRI. ArcView represents the state of GIS about 10 years
ago. That was a good point in time because the fundamentals of GIS were well
established by that point. A GPL'd ArcView could become a powerful
educational tool that, ultimately, would drive greater demand for ArcGIS.

As far as abandoning analysts with Avenue... ArcGIS through .NET and COM
exposes considerably more functionality than you ever got with Avenue. The
reason Avenue was so simple, semantically, was that the exposed
functionality was very limited. Consider that ArcGIS Desktop (ArcView,
ArcEditor, ArcInfo 9.2) are essentially just implementations of the
functionality exposed by the ArcGIS COM objects. The objects are also
available without the ArcGIS Desktop interface. The transition from ArcView
3.3 to ArcGIS was really hampered by it's complexity. This caused alot of
delays that resulted in people getting really closely tied to Avenue and not
feeling like they can adopt the ArcGIS COM structure.

Overall, I'd say ESRI mostly has an identity problem. They still haven't
fully realized that they are a software company. And they are a software
company on the scale of Microsoft. They need people who are very good at
structuring APIs. And they also need people who better understand software
lifecycles.

As for an opensource interpreter for Avenue... Most of the osgeo
environments already have a solid scripting component - usually in Java.
Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, I think it's better for open source
to move forward with things like JUMP. Of course, an Avenue interpreter in
JUMP might be an interesting project!

-Eric

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Howard Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> On Apr 18, 2008, at 5:15 PM, percy wrote:
>
>  I think the key here is to discuss the Extensions to Arcview and Arcmap.
> > Much of the base functionality can be covered by these FOSS desktop clients
> > like gvSIG and QGIS and UDIG, but extensions like Spatial analyst and 3D
> > analyst, for some of us, is where it becomes difficult to our work done
> > using only FOSS.
> >
>
> I think a key component would be an open source interpreter for Avenue
> implemented for either QGIS, uDig, or gvSIG.  It wouldn't need to be
> complete parity with what ArcView 3.x had, but if it were at least an 80/20
> solution, folks with scripts and utilities that they're using for basic data
> manipulation and simple analysis would have an upgrade path.
>
> ESRI abandoned lots of smalltime developers when they moved from ArcView
> 3.x to ArcGIS and didn't bring the Avenue folks along for the ride.  Rather
> than face the migration cost of rewriting all of their Avenue code, they're
> just sitting there hoping things will continue to work unsupported for a
> while.  ESRI's not going to bring Avenue forward -- they've moved on to .NET
> and COM Python wrappers -- and I think there's a significant audience of
> analysis-oriented folks that were left behind.  If the open source world
> gave these folks a potential migration path, it might generate enough
> interest and funding to bootstrap it.
>
> Alternatively, if ESRI wanted to totally fluster the open source desktop
> market, they could GPL ArcView (the pieces of it they own and could actually
> license) and let all of us freetards froth over it for two or three years
> trying to beat it into some kind of shape.  By the time we actually get it
> to work, they'll probably be end-of-life'ing ArcGIS and on to the next
> thing...
>
> Howard
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
>



-- 
-=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-
Eric B. Wolf 720-209-6818
PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://lists.burri.to/pipermail/geowanking/attachments/20080418/4ef18b0f/attachment.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking

End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 53, Issue 17
******************************************




------
Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document 
Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info 
for more information.

_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking

Reply via email to