Google Keyhole, Google Scholar 270
baegucb_18706 writes "The front page of Google has a link to Keyhole where you can download a free trial of satellite imagery. Is it worth the cost for a subscription, and is it the start of the real commercialism for Google? And a challenge to MS's imagery?" D H NG writes "According to CNET, Google introduced a new service for academics called Google Scholar on Wednesday. This service searches scholarly literature such as technical reports, theses and abstracts. This service will not carry ads." And finally, reader ian@FalsePositives.com links to some speculation about how a sufficiently competent search engine could write the news itself.
Satelite imagery (Score:4, Interesting)
Unless someone can show me otherwise.
lexis-nexis replacement (Score:5, Interesting)
NASA? (Score:5, Interesting)
Authors (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm an author. Why would I want my articles in Google Scholar?
Your work likely has great value to a number of people who may not know it exists. By including your articles in Google Scholar, others will be more likely to find them, learn from them, cite them and build on the foundation you have laid.
Sounds like a good way to make yourself known in the writing world. For now, it sounds like a kickass idea. Go Google.
Scholar search! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:5, Interesting)
It will be an amazing asset for schools and colleges etc. The 3d exploration module looks really good, and combined with being able to switch to a martian map, it increases it uses further.
I see some of the imagary is scanned at a 3inch resolution (Las vegas for example), but the majority of the planet is at the lesser 70cm-1m range.
3 inches! Just think about how detailed that is, they can see your Tin Foil Beany. They KNOW your wearing it.
I live in England and would love this software, but they don't seem to have the resolution here yet (London is down as a 70cm map, I'm nowhere near there so its useless...
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:3, Interesting)
I know surveyors who use terraserver multiple times per day. It is a vital tool for them.
Re:Not a big deal (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't have the link when I hit the main page, but even so, it's a link. You don't want the service, don't click on it...
It's not a popup, it's not tricking people to click on it... and if it helps google continue providing the service they provide, I'm for it...
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:5, Interesting)
Keyholes Maps (Score:4, Interesting)
3 inches (Score:3, Interesting)
Not quite licenes plate reading, but getting there.
I think I'll put a brim on my tin-foil hat.
Keyhole needs throughput capacity (Score:2, Interesting)
If they could have kept my DSL pipe full (or even occasionally full) when pulling down the image data I probably would have sprung for the subscription but the service was just unacceptably slow.
They do recommend that users have a broadband connection, so presumably the throughput will improve someday. However, if you're thinking about trying the service, do use enough of the free trial period to find out if it's fast enough for you.
Re:Not a big deal (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the more relevant question is, will the average Joe Blow pay a monthly subscription for this just to occasionally play. I bet, and Google is betting, that the answer to that is yes. Look at all the other garbage people spend money on for play.
Also, why is using this "for play" not a valid reason for it to be offered?
Worries about Scholar (Score:5, Interesting)
So it's basically CiteSeer? (Score:5, Interesting)
I am curious which produces better search results. Google seems to produce its results mainly from a handful of sources, but a couple of tests showed it giving more relevant results than CiteSeer, and Google Scholar also immediately returned a copy of this one specific article I was trying to find awhile back that I knew to exist but couldn't find either on CiteSeer or Google normal search... Hmm.
At any rate CiteSeer indexes 716797 articles and Google Scholar... interestingly, doesn't provide an index size number at all.
Google is thinking outside the box... (Score:3, Interesting)
This shows some initiative and creativity in trying to develop new ways for people to find all kinds of information, both on your desktop and on the Internet... just imagine when they get all this stuff integrated... you could search for a friend's address, and not only get a map of their house, but a satellite-guided view of the trip, as well as links to their website, public photo collection, slashdot and blog posts, e-mails you've written them, and scholarly articles they've written. Google wants to be a total information provider, and they're the only ones truly pulling all of this stuff together.
Re:Keyholes Maps (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Price (Score:2, Interesting)
I purchased this service about a year ago for NV, before the buyout by Google. Their NV version was $10 cheaper than the LT version. I forget the cost at the moment.
I tried them out after hearing they were the service used by the news media (CNN I think) during the latest Iraq war to display the area and mountainous regions where troops were travelling. They may have used the Pro version, which lets you script something like flights over all the data and display it without the interface by exporting it as a movie. I think Pro also lets you hold more of the images cached so you don't have to stream them if you don't need to.
I've also used the NASA software, which is free. The Keyhole one seems to have more data currently, and is all streamed as needed for consumer versions, whereas the NASA software was a more kludgy and came with several large images right away, making for a bigger install. Also, NASA had some problems with their image streaming servers which meant every area you wanted to focus in on with higher granularity you had to download another set of large images for. Granted, it's also nice to have the images on my own machine so I can view them in other applications, I don't think everyone who wants to view the Earth this way wants to download all the images they will view (it's a usability issue.)
The Keyhole software is easy to adapt to, quite powerful in features, hasn't had a problem with their streaming servers for as long as I've used it, has other data layers it can display (districts, crime rates, school zones, etc.) and also has images of Mars. I hope the NASA one picks up the pace a bit, I haven't renewed my Keyhole subscription yet (even though it's cheaper now) because I haven't made as much use of it as of late.
P.S. If either Keyhole or NASA developers are reading this, please include driving directions features as I would want so desparately to use this over Mapquest or Yahoo's services. If the NASA stuff goes OS, perhaps I'll look into helping make that possible (hint, hint!)
Re:Keyhole (Score:2, Interesting)
How do you propose that we handle that problem?
Also, if we wanted to keep a few gigs worth of data on our machines why not just download all of the maps? A DVD distro would be nice as long as it had web updates.
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:4, Interesting)
Keyhole is astonishingly good! (Score:2, Interesting)
The program still has a few rough edges, but even at this stage it's the most fun I've ever had for $30 - at least 10 times more entertaining than the $50 that I blew on Doom 3 ("every black pixel carefully rendered by hand").
Keyhole combined aerial photography with topographic data. It uses the topo data to construct a 3-D surface that maps to the actual terrain. It then lays the aerial photography down on the 3-D surface to provide a 3-D model of the terrain. You can fly through the 3-D space just like you were in a helicopter.
For mountainous areas the 3-D representation is eerily realistic. The skyline as viewed from my house looks PRECISELY like the view out my window.
You can also lay down custom images on top of the terrain. I took a trail map of the park by my house and easily laid it down on top of the park itself. By controlling the opacity of the map, I could easily use the map to help identify buildings and trails that I could see on the photos. There are lots of custom overlays on their bbs - so you can, for example, lay the nighttime light map of the world on top of the real world, and fade back-n-forth from the daytime view via keyhole and the nighttime view. Fun for answering the question, "so what city is THAT bright spot?"
Cities look a bit silly in 3D, since the topo data doesn't know about building heights. Manhattan is pretty flat, with lots of tall buildings painted on the ground. But mountains look unbelievably realistic.
I've shown it to about a dozen people since I got it, and at least 4 have purchased their own copy.
In short, it's an infinite timesink. Lots of fun.
Re:Google is thinking outside the box... (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, in the case of Google Scholar, it's a late entry into the market. It also threatens to derail some significant public and free efforts at making scholarly information available on the web. Altogether, I'm not convinced that Google Scholar is something to be welcomed.
Re:Google is thinking outside the box... (Score:2, Interesting)
Look at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave on Keyhole... (Score:2, Interesting)