]
Cc: Young Andrew; mapinfo-l@lists.directionsmag.com;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Ang. Re: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
Hi All!
To further kindle the fire on the matter of multi-topological geodatasets,
let's consider another analogy:
What if you would have to create separate tables
@lists.directionsmag.com
Kopia
Ärende
Re: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
Hello Andrew
I entirely agree with you. We have used this capability when structuring
our
Mastermap holding so that - for example - all the height info (points and
text) is in one table, and the boundary data has linework
Road
P.O. Box 139
Bright
Victoria 3741
Ph (03) 5755 0552
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 6 December 2005 10:44 AM
To: MapInfo-L@lists.directionsmag.com
Subject: RE: Ang. Re: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
Hi Lars
ESRI has already solved this with their geodatabase concept, and even
have a more homogeneous product line these days. Oh dear, there I
went ranting after all :-)
Are you really sure? ESRI has now about 10 different own formats, you
sometimes hardly can convert efficienlty with
: Re: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
Hi Maggie
I use both all the time, mainly MapInfo, why?
- MapInfo is far easier to use and far more powerful when it comes to
fiddeling around with data (capture of smple features and attributes)
- MapInfo is way faster
- MapInfo has the better data
@lists.directionsmag.com
Subject: Re: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
Hi Flavio,
Just to comment on your points :
MapInfo is far easier to use and far more powerful when it comes to
fiddeling around with data (capture of smple features and attributes)
Ease of use is always a matter of choice
, December 02, 2005 12:19 PM
Subject: RE: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
Lars,
What objective argument leads you to that conclusion ? If you're
referring to the ability of the TAB format to hold multiple topography, I
find that to be mostly irrelevant, 1) since most use the tables for
single
PROTECTED]
To: Lars Nielsen (GisPro) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: mapinfo-l@lists.directionsmag.com
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS Comparison
hi lars
MapInfo is far easier to use ...
yeah, try to edit a line or an attribute ... in ArcGIS it is fifty
clicks
I'm just tired of hearing the same age-old arguments of MIPro's
superiority ...
it is just astonishing that it still is, despite they did not do
anything usable for years ... I agree with you on that, they could do a
lot better if they would not DEEPLY sleep!
as said, I use both ... and out
This topic comes up every so often, it's latest was back in September.
I would encourage you to search the Mapinfo List archives on the subject
MapInfo v ArcGis One of the posts in that thread provided a very good
article on the subject located at:
http://www.sgsi.com/MIUserGroup/Why_MI.htm
HTH
this would actually be a GREAT entry to put into the WIKI
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Reid
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 2:55 PM
To: 'Maggie Ma'; mapinfo-l@lists.directionsmag.com
Subject: RE: [MI-L] MapInfo and ArcGIS
Hi Maggie,
The SGSI document is *not* a good place to start when comparing MIPro
and ArcGIS. It's just a collection of old management yada, most of which
are completely irrelevant and out-dated in this day and age. But by all
means do as Dave suggests, and roam the list archive for previous
Hi Maggie
I use both all the time, mainly MapInfo, why?
- MapInfo is far easier to use and far more powerful when it comes to
fiddeling around with data (capture of smple features and attributes)
- MapInfo is way faster
- MapInfo has the better data format (see my other mail to Lars)
- for
13 matches
Mail list logo
