hi lars
> Just curious, whether this is in fact a provable fact, or just one of
> those prejudicies against all Arc products we've all perpetuated thru
> the years ?
I don't think it is a prejudice ... we have long time experience with
both and arcgis is far more complicated to use ... just editing one
attribute is miles away from just clicking on it (such as in word to
edit a document you'd have to go through five edit menus to start
editing it ... grrrr). editing in general is far more complicated (and
if you have arceditor and arcsde it is of course more powerful, so for
high end it might be suited, for 98% of the people unsuited ... such as
98% use shapes and for editing shape kind of simpliest features mapinfo
is just perfect).
in general mapinfo is:
- far easier and miles faster. this the major differentiator I see:
performance!
- what I like a lot with mapinfo is ascii workspaces and an ascii
format such as mif/mid (search replace and cut&paste is always handy!).
- getting data in and out is far easier and there are not ten formats
from the same company you have to deal with ...
- mapinfo tab is one of the best formats ever. for sure the fastest on
earth, spatial indexing is simply impressive (and you don't have to do
it manually ...)
really good features of arcgis missing in mapinfo are:
- georeferencing/warping of raster is amazingly good implemented and
for once easy to use and as well fast!
- cartographc capabilities are superior, like being able to define your
own fill patterns. however it can get really really slow if you have
lot of text and symbols on a map (even with fairly small datasets)
- transparency !!!
- layout is superior (i.e. rotation capabilities)
ciao
flavio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com |
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message number: 15320
