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.
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!
http://www.govtech.com/gt/215146?topic=117676
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!
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.
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.
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?
let me read it for you:
height matters,
acuraccy matters,
how reliable is your base map?
this "neogeo" can provide acuraccy?
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"?
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.
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.
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
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.