![The Map Room: A Weblog About Maps [logo]](/maproom/images/title_inverse.jpg)
The Low Profile of Microsoft’s Mapping Effort
Why does Microsoft’s online mapping service get so little attention compared with Google’s?
Peter Laudati thinks it’s because it’s gone through so many name changes, from Virtual Earth to Windows Live Local to whatever they’re calling it now — he counts at least eight web addresses that resolve to the service. (Dare Obasanjo: “This product has now officially gone through more names than I’ve had ex-girlfriends. … It’s sad that we are intent on screwing one of the coolest products we are shipping these days in this way.”)
Scoble thinks it comes down to ease of use: Google’s typically simple, uncluttered, non-redundant user interface.
Me, I suspect that cross-browser and cross-platform compatibility might play a factor: a lot of the people who write the stories that generate the buzz use Macs. (Live Maps doesn’t work at all on Safari, and it’s apparently not feature-complete on Firefox.)
Plus, I think Microsoft simply doesn’t have much goodwill left: if you say that Microsoft has produced something truly amazing, many of us will simply conclude that you’re a shill on their payroll.
Categories: Online Maps
I have to join the growing chorus (Paul Graham, Jason Kottke) chanting that Microsoft is if not dead, increasingly irrelevant.
Paul Graham’s essay is here: Microsoft Is Dead. In the sense that it doesn’t matter. Microsoft smacks of me-too-ism a lot lately: they will compete in every tech market, but will not necessarily be competitive.
Now taking bets on the next name for Microsoft’s maps. My prediction: Zune Maps!
I think it’s too bad Microsoft’s mapping application does not get more press. I think Google’s application pails in comparison to MS’ application.
I prefer:
- The look and feel of the street data
- The aerial photos appear to have a higher resolution
- The color balancing of the imagery appears better to me
- Birds eye (Pictometry) imagery is extremely helpful and cool
- The ability to draw on the imagery with point, line, and polygons
- The ability to create customized maps
I understand from people who are far better programmers than I that the Microsoft API is far more advanced than Google’s.
I think one of the biggest reasons Google gets more press is because people find Google cool and not Microsoft. Microsoft is considered old school. Google is much like Apple, if Apple farts people get excited. Weather or not Google is actually better or not is not the issue, people perceive Google as better. I’m not trying to say that Microsoft’s poo don’t stink, they have many flaws, but they have done a bang up job with Local Live, er, Virtual Earth, er, oh whatever they call it today.
I think that all of the reasons listed above in the post are correct, in that Microsoft kind of shoots itself in the foot.
Which is unfortunate, because when they do come along and develop something better or something that competes, they get shunned by the market.
I see this with some of their other products right now. Vista isn’t going to get nearly the press it should, and I’ve even read articles in Linux magazines giving the new platform high marks (while all the time swearing that the author isn’t a Microsoft Shill).
Also, at the ESRI Developer’s Conference this year, the keynote was Mark Driver of Gartner research. His entire speech was a comparison of .NET development architecture vs. Java, and he had some pretty nice things to say about the .NET environment and how far Microsoft has come.
Does that mean that everything MS touches is gold? Far from it. But we should be evaluating their products without bias and noting when they actually do something right.