Neogeography is not GIS; not LI

About Directions

Calendar

Syndicate This Blog

RSS 0.91 feed

RSS 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 feed

Top Referers

www.thegisforum.com (59)
atlas.ca.gov (53)
planetgs.com (30)
friendfeed.com (22)
www.atlas.ca.gov (21)

Special Announcement

Our Points

Tuesday, December 4. 2007

Neogeography is not GIS; not LI

Speaking at Korem's Geodiffusion conference, Pitney Bowes Software president, Mike Hickey, struck a resonant chord when he explained that "the explosion of Neogeography is driving awareness [and] collaborative data consolidation [but it] isn't GIS." Hickey explained that while neogeography is focused on "Where" there is no data creation and no spatial analysis, an essentially visually useful concept that has helped "cross the chasm from early adopters to an early majority."

My take is decidedly biased and I come down on Hickey's side entirely. He sees that while the neogeography approach to location technology has propelled non-technically focused proponents of evolutionary change, this path leads to the early majority group of businesses and other users who are, as Hickey states, "more pragmatic, adverse to risk and looking for proven applications."

Hickey's statements cogently define the growth and progression of location technology from merely the eye candy of mashups to the adoption of a broader fundamental IT architecture and strategy for bringing location intelligent solutions to the enterprise. The next phase of adoption will see more integration between BI and LI solutions and a demand from the vertical market segments to customize software that makes sense for their business processes.

Posted by Joe Francica in PBBI [MapInfo], Location Intelligence at 15:00 | Comments (19) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

It's essentially just repurposing of existing content. In many cases, creative and innovative - though not always. And in some cases, unique new perspective is created by leveraging prior investments and data content. But at the end of the day, the old maxim still holds, "content is king".

#1 Dave Smith (Link) on 2007-12-04 18:56 (Reply)

Joe, I have to say I disagree pretty strongly here. I don't see how you can say that there is no data creation in neogeography, when creation of "crowdsourced" or community generated data is one of the hottest trends in the industry at the moment. See my recent post on OpenStreetMap for just one of many examples. And there are many interesting things going on in terms of analysis outside the traditional GIS area, for example what FortiusOne is doing with GeoCommons.

#2 Peter Batty (Link) on 2007-12-04 22:02 (Reply)

Peter...we need to move beyond the "eye candy" status of mashups and I think that was Mike's point. I agree with this perspective and while I fully understand that there are many "crowdsourced" and other means of contributed data, we are hung up on semantics. The broader business community is clueless to the term "neogeography" and probably should be retired sooner rather than later along with other incredibly confusing terms, like GIS. Businesses need solutions that work and whether you are using a Google Maps API or Oracle Tools, at the end of the day you better have a solution that is an effective use of geographically referenced information with a visualization interface that people understand. I don't want to put words in Mike's mouth, but that is my interpretation.

#2.1 Joe Francica on 2007-12-05 10:07 (Reply)

Crowdsourcing has its shining moments, but it also has its definite limits as well... As one of the other hats I wear is that of a surveyor, I had to shudder recently when another geoblogger, excited about the prospects of crowdsourcing, actually suggested having the public contribute property boundary information to a cadastral model. QA/QC is difficult enough in a cadastre even with professionals involved - there are quite a few other similar situations involving other types of geospatial data.

#3 Dave Smith (Link) on 2007-12-04 22:14 (Reply)

Dave, I agree that crowdsourcing has its limits, though I think it is unclear exactly where those will be. But my main point is that the statement that "there is no data creation" in neogeography is completely wrong.

#4 Peter Batty (Link) on 2007-12-04 23:11 (Reply)

Its like when journalists says that the bloggers are not journalists! Same explosion, same felling of being threat by the mass.

What ever the complexity of the resulting application, as long as there are customer to buy the solution and users to enjoy it, its "geospatial", simple GIS maybe, but still "geospatial".

Welcome to the neogeography that push the other conventional players to MOVE, perform and be creative!

#5 Luc Vaillancourt (Link) on 2007-12-05 04:25 (Reply)

Luc: Although I am cringing as I write this, we as bloggers are neojournalists. But blogging is many things to many people and to journalists, I like to use blogging as a "news feed." Others use it for different purposes. Yes, there are many good journalists who blog. Are they journalists or bloggers? I'm not sure it matters but in our use of the technology, we use APB to report news quickly. That's a huge benefit to us. It is also "unedited" and that has both good and bad side effects. The same may be true for neogeographers who give up some control with "crowdsourced" information. Regardless, we need ot be mindful of the tool at our disposal and the power it wields.

#5.1 Joe Francica (Link) on 2007-12-05 10:38 (Reply)

Mr. Hickey better tell that to NGA, the state of Alabama, and all of the other organizations that are using Google Earth to analyze spatial data.
http://www.govtech.com/gt/215146?topic=117676

#6 JOD on 2007-12-05 05:35 (Reply)

Virtual Alabama is not an analysis tool. It is a visualization tool to help first responders in a disaster situation. Now, maybe we are getting confused on semantics again. Certainly you can "analyze" an image for its relevance but in the classic sense of the word you would not be able to perform a complex spatial query. But again, you can certainly search on data elements and for some...that is performing an analysis. Semantics is a real problem and we had better figure this out when speaking plainly to those outside our industry that need to be informed about the benefits of our technology.

#6.1 Joe Francica on 2007-12-05 10:14 (Reply)

Agreed, Peter...

With respect to what does or doesn't constitute the "NeoGeo" realm, there are likewise a lot of folks who diverge in opinions, with some folks, perhaps Hickey himself, who would only point to things like mashups - but as far as analysis goes, we have to ask, what was the purpose of the mashup to begin with? It was most likely for visualization and analysis!

#7 Dave Smith (Link) on 2007-12-05 06:41 (Reply)

Joe,

I disagree with your point strongly and Mike Hiokey as well.

Neogeography is part of the wider spatial landscape. I would argue that through finding beer stores, locating swimming pools, determining where to find low or high paid workers, which are some of the neogeography applications etc. is in fact building spatial literacy at a fantastic pace. This is causing people to think analytically, regular, ordinary folks. In fact, I would argue, many more people will be working up the spatial ladder to 'geo' applications in the future. The analysis is present. The quality may vary or be questionable, but analysis is present.

But...

You also said, "The broader business community is clueless to the term "neogeography" and probably should be retired sooner rather than later along with other incredibly confusing terms, like GIS." I disagree.

If you travel anywhere in the world, you will hear the term 'GIS' much more than the term geomatics, geospatial or many of the other terms.

I think it is a very positive thing that Bentley, Autodesk, ESRI and a host of others use that term. In places like Latvia, Italy, Russia, Estonia, Finland - GIS is a common term. If one wants to make headway in Europe, I would venture that GIS has a standard understanding. The Open Source Community is also filled with it, at least in Europe.

#8 Jeff Thurston (Link) on 2007-12-05 12:19 (Reply)

Jeff:
You are thinking like a GIS person. While GIS will live on in our "geospatial" part of the IT sector, it does not have a place in mainstream IT as we know it. If neogeography has done anything it is to instill the notion that we do not need a "system" to build simple visualization interfaces to large spatial databases. And while GIS will always be a highly effective solution for organizations that must leverage massive amounts of geo-referenced data, business processes that only need "some" geospatial data will be served by web services, applets, mashups, and other solutions that leverage Flash, AJAX, etc. to get the job done quicker and with less complexity.

#8.1 Joe Francica on 2007-12-05 18:59 (Reply)

NeoGeo is scaring the pants off of ESRI. Suddenly an outfit that over the years dominated geographical thinking and methods, is a "me too" canidate that essentially lags with slow and buggy solutions that require tens of thousands of dollars of licenses to achieve what is freely available. And to suggest the NeoGoeo up-starts are some how less analytical is a fools comment.

Seems to me the innovation investments now driving geographical awareness comes from advertisement and not licensing and relicening and support fees and up-date fees and data fees and more support fees and ding-you-again and again fees and...

NeoGeo seems magical... it just works and its getting more and more powerful weekly. Hotest topic that has me totally distracted is what will GeoWiki-like crowd geography do next?

#9 Neil Havermale (Link) on 2007-12-06 14:40 (Reply)

I was reading these entries here...and i looked at a banner on top of page.

let me read it for you:

height matters,
acuraccy matters,
how reliable is your base map?

this "neogeo" can provide acuraccy?

#10 George on 2007-12-06 17:12 (Reply)

It's not so much a question of whether "neogeo" can provide accuracy; it's more a matter of whether accuracy is demanded. I would argue that accuracy is demanded in every way imaginable. The "neogeo" movement will only strengthen the market for the portion of the geospatial community that provides the infrastructure (basemaps, imagery, etc).

Can we get past our egos & realize that all that we ever could have hoped for is now here & it's bigger than what we ever imagined? Are we going to fight it because we call ourselves "purists"?

#10.1 Mike on 2007-12-06 23:36 (Reply)

The confusion comes from the definition and meaning of neogeography. More than a specific technology (mashups, virtual globes..), it is rather a new approach of geography. One thing for sure neogeo is not a substitute of GIS, not even a threat. It is just a new paradigm. Most neogeo applications are led by a goal where the location (XY) factor is just one of the attribute of the data and not its core value. But adding this location information and being able to display it easily on an on line map system opens new avenues. Traditional GIS architectures are built bottom to top : choose your GIS (and/or database), collect and store relevant data, run analysis, a answer questions. And the amount of $ spent often follows the same pyramidal structure. In neogeo approach the pyramid is turned upside down. The first purpose is to answer a specific issue : locate, display, track an information that has value to me. Then I choose relevant data to collect and store (some of it already available from the web).
Where it gets more "confusing" is when neogeo project's purpose is to collect geodata out of a specific scope because at that point collected data doesn't answer a specific question.
For data display, integration and analysis neogeo has a true added value. For geodata collection through open contribution architecture, neogeo approach is not mature yet. Complying OGC data standards is a first step in that direction. Metadata will ne the next battle.
Neogeo is not a good or a bad thing, it is just there and we d better get used to it.

#11 riallant david (Link) on 2007-12-08 16:01 (Reply)

There is no doubt that "neogeography" is raising the awareness of the value of location in a much broader community than ever before. And lots of great ideas are being discussed, tested, and so forth.

However, as a professional geographer, I have a hard time understanding why we need the term "neogeography". Sure, there are new, creative ideas and implementations related to the use of digital location. But new and creative ideas, research, and implementations have been happening on a regular basis in our discipline for generations.

So, let's put neogeography in context.

Lightweight protocols and expressions of location exist in some of the earliest internet standards. Internet/web deployed applications that use "geo" have been around - with "geo" either being core or just an attribute - since 1993.

The first digital geo/mapping mashups really happened back in the late 1980's. I know because I participated in them.

Digital cartography and GIS has been around since the early 1960's or late 1950's.

The earliest manual map mashups happened back in the mid 19th century.

We can keep going back into the history of Geography. Every time there was a new and exciting development of the use of geography/location, we could have labeled this event "neogeography".

The science of geographic analysis and the use location in decision processes has been evolving for thousands of years. New tools and processes have always been and will continue to be an integral part of the evolution of the science.

So why give a new name to what is happening now? What has been labeled neogeography is simply another step in the evolution of the understanding and use of geography.

#12 Carl Reed on 2007-12-10 07:05 (Reply)

Bingo!!

Maybe people should call it neo-GIS, neo-matics, or something along those lines. Not neo-geography. It's not new geography, it's appling new technology to ole geography basics or principles.

KoS

#12.1 KoS on 2007-12-10 12:58 (Reply)

As a professional geographer I'll reply that the difference is the other 99% of the world is paying attention now. While the GIS world has made several innovations in the past the vast majority of the world either did not know or care. This may sound harsh but it is the reality. You can argue whether the Google effect caused this or intuitive user friendly applications, but at the end of the day it does not really matter.

Neogeography, whether you like the term or not, is here to stay. Further, it is only going to continue to encroach on traditional GIS and functionality like spatial analysis. The key differentiator is neogeography is democratizing GIS, slowly but surely. Just as the spreadsheet democratized accounting and statistical functions neogeography will allow anyone to create a map. The first maps are simple mashups, but technology and demand will inexorably incorporate other GIS functionality that is relevant and useful for the non-professional user. Neither GIS nor the professional geographer will go away, but they will no longer have a monopoly on the technology. At the end of the day everyone will better off and there will be a far greater aggregate demand for maps, geodata, and geographic expertise. Of course those companies that refuse to see or accept change will go the way of many before them.

#12.2 Sean Gorman (Link) on 2007-12-10 13:18 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Advertisers

Polls

What's your preferred format for electronic publications?

	July '09
Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31