On Aug 16, 2006, at 18:42, Matthew Perry wrote:
Ian,
On 8/16/06, Ian White|Urban Mapping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's a good case of geo-cultural neglect--one of my guys was
looking at
GE's imagery of Flint MI and the resolution is quite poor--no
question some
remote areas of China have higher resolution. Thoughts? Theories?
Conspiracies?
Soooo.. because Google neglegted to obtain high-res photography for
[...]
Still all kidding aside, I would like to know how Google decides what
imagery to obtain and what imagery to leave out. Was there some sort
of return-on-investment analysis that decided it was more important to
provide certain cities with imagery versus others? Who knows, maybe
they really do have something against people from Flint and/or
Connecticut ;-)
This could be because Google does not commission any data acquisition
but rather buy data that other companies already have. That's far
less expensive than getting someone to go out and collect new imagery.
I suspect that over time, that alone will make it possible to reduce
the prices for the "first use" customer and might bring down prices
overall.
Allan
--
Allan Doyle
+1.781.433.2695
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
