Just to add to this:
ArcView is what we use and it seems to work well - and as Crispin says, it
is possible to write scripts and extensions to customise it which we have
been able to take advantage of.
Also, ESRI who produce ArcView have taken over UNIFORM which is the planning
application information system fairly widely used in local authorities and
they are busy (so I understand) integrating the two. This could be useful
for SMRs.
John Wood
--------------------------------------------------------
John Wood
Inverness
This is a personal, not an official communication, and any opinions
expressed do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
This Email is confidential and intended for the exclusive use of the
addressee(s) only. You should not disclose its contents to any other
person. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender
named above immediately.
-----Original Message-----
From: Crispin Flower [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 21 October 2000 08:41
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: MapInfo v ArcView -Reply
Never having used MapInfo I'm not well-placed to comment here, but I
remember that when the same question came up on gisarch a couple of years
ago Paul Miller pointed out that whatever the relative merits of the
'out-of-the-box' user interfaces, ArcView won hands down for its scripting
capabilities - the ability to make it do things it can't do by default
through the standard interface using its own full object-oriented
programming language.
And with the various 'extensions' that can be acquired at outrageous prices,
it
also has pretty much every aspect of GIS finctionality that you could ever
want, and plenty more.
One other very important plus point for ArcView is that it has a massive
international user community, with web sites, discussion lists etc where you
can get help, scripts etc. Maybe MapInfo has this too, but I doubt if it
will be as extensive.
ArcView has special software for managing OS data imports (again, at a
price!)
Crispin
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Evans" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>; <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: MapInfo v ArcView -Reply
> Although I have seen Archview in action and we use MapInfo as the
> corporate mapping package here in South Glos. I think it all depends on
> what you want to do and how. MapInfo certainly has some annoying
> habits; change an index and you can damage all your workspaces, I find
> in general it works well. We have a set of the various early OS maps and
> a 1999 series of APs which can be used for backgrouds. I recently
> traced an airfield decoy using such a background.
>
> >>> "Mike Shaw" <[log in to unmask]> 20/October/2000
> 03:12pm >>>
> Having used Mapinfo at Northants, transferred to ArcView at Cheshire
> and now
> gone back to Mapinfo at Wolverhampton/Black Country I feel that I should
> be
> able to speak with some authority on this subject, although I have no
> claims
> to be an IT wizard so my observations are fairly basic.
>
> I found ArcView a lot easier to use than Mapinfo. It seems more intuitive
> and easier and quicker for basic drawing and editing, simple querying
> and
> preparing layouts.
>
> On the other hand you do seem to be able to do more with Mapinfo.
> Raster
> images can be registered to the National Grid (albeit, so I am told,
rather
> primitively) so if you have the early OS maps from Landmark this is a
> consideration. They have to be reconfigured for ArcView (10% of
> purchase
> price if you ask Landmark to undertake it). The limitations of ArcView
> can
> be overcome by use of its 'big brother' ArcInfo. This system looks rather
> daunting for a non-specialist so its use may depend on what level of IT
> support is available to you.
>
> Another consideration is that Mapinfo and ArcView require the OS maps
> in
> different formats. Presumably this would not be a problem to you if you
> transferred to your local authority standard system but if you stayed
> with a
> different system you might find extra expense when the OS mapping
> was
> updated.
>
> The final consideration is that ExeGesIS SMR was originally designed to
> run
> with Mapinfo so you might find the link with ArcView was not as good
> but I
> am sure that others can comment on this better than I.
>
> You can always comfort yourself with the thought that, unlike me, you
> don't
> have an SMR covering four different authorities who use two entirely
> different GIS systems!
>
> Mike Shaw
> Black Country Archaeologist
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Victoria Bryant" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 10:02 AM
> Subject: MapInfo v ArcView
>
>
> > The Worcestershire SMR uses exegisis with MapInfo.
> > Worcestershire County Council has recently decided to go over to
> > Arch Info and ArchView. It would seem sensible for the SMR to
> > transfer to Arch View as well but I wondered if any of you had any
> > feelings for or against MapInfo and ArcView generally and the way
> > they work in exegisis in particular?
> >
> > Thank you in anticipation
> >
> > Victoria Bryant
> > Victoria Bryant
> > Information and Records Officer
> > Worcestershire Archaeological Service
> > Woodbury Hall
> > University College Worcester, WR2 6AJ
> > Tel: 01905 855494
> > Fax 01905 855035
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the system manager.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
>
> www.mimesweeper.com
> **********************************************************************
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|