Phelan kidded that we will be the last generation to know what it means to get lost. (I found that timely since I got a bit “turned around” on my run in the area and used “old technology” to get back on track. I asked a fellow out for a walk for directions!) After offering a quick history of online mapping from its beginnings in 1993 (when GPS was operational, and Xerox Parc offered the first map server) through the dotcom boom in 1995 (when Multimap was founded), to the bust in 1999 (MapQuest IPO and later sale to AOL) he got to his company’s recent history.

By 2002 investor money was drying up and Multimap put its focus on its B2B (store locator) business and investing little in its consumer website. By 2005, Google Maps launched and whether planned or not opened its API and provided its data to “pirates.” Multimap couldn’t follow suit, due to its data supplier restrictions. So, to “keep up” with the current technology play Multimap had to invest heavily. The company upgraded to “slippy maps,” provided an API, with support, service level agreements and a tile cache. Still with that work behind it, the company couldn’t slow down development; it had to invest more. That’s when Phelan and his company outlined a strategy to become the “third player” in the online map market with Google and Microsoft. The vision was along the line of Reuters, in the news business. Multimap could be a third player in mapping with a European focus, just as Reuters is a third player in news with a European focus. To get there new investors were needed. There was investment interest - but many of those interested wanted a majority stake, which was not Multimap’s plan. Then, push came to shove with the TomTom and Nokia data company acquisitions and a change in UK tax laws on investor shares. With the acquisitions, there’d be no “third player” role and the tax laws made investing more costly. Thus, it was time to sell to Microsoft in late 2007.

Phelan’s pearls of wisdom from the wild ride include:

- plan for the world stage, but be ready for that stage to change quickly
- expect “evolution not intelligent design” in our market
remember that big companies do big projects, and small companies do small ones
keep an eye on the small ones for the newest innovations
- look to current issues to drive those innovations including: congestion charges, high fuel costs, crowdsourced data, ubiquitous GPS, 3rd party app with apis
- never forget the economics of the industry
- read: The Innovator’s Dilemma (I believe my hand was the only one raised when he asked who’d heard of/read Clayton Christiansen’s book which details disruptive technology)

Lawrence offered a number of OS “feel good stories” (like its distribution of maps to school children), its OpenSpace initiative (which currently has 900 registered developers) and how we, those who know geospatial are really the ones to whom those dealing with climate change and other challenges should turn. It was a bit too much preaching to the choir for my taste, but her other messages, about the state of affairs at the OS was not lost on the regional audience. In particular she mentioned the Trading Fund assessment (Terms of Reference, .doc) which is currently evaluating a first set of UK’s Trading Funds (definition). OS is among that first group and recommendations are expected this fall. The UK Location Strategy document, promised last year, but not yet available was also of interest to the assembled crowd, since once complete, it will direct geospatial implementation (no data collection duplication, common reference data, common standards and required skills) related to embedded location across government. Lawrence was quick to note that none of it would be revolutionary to practitioners, but it would be significant when implemented.

Zeiss continued his efforts to highlight the challenges across the planet, from global warming to the lack of skilled workers and the decrease in construction productivity and the role for investments in CAD, GIS, BIM and related technologies to help. Not only can they help dig us out of these situations, he suggested, but they can also encourage collateral successes like modeling urban environments.

What missing to build those models? Higher resolutions data, intelligence (not just pictures), other data types and new applications so we can go beyond “just” communication/shadow analysis/view protection uses of these models. The real strength of such models, Zeiss maintains, is their ability to convey the result of complex analyses.

Time limited the Q&A but here is one highlight, with responses paraphrased:

Q: How do we solve the worker capacity issue?
A: Phelan - Don’t just look for geospatially-trained people, and don’t look just in your home country. Multimap taps programmers in Istanbul, for example.

A: Williams - There are not enough of us to speak to those unfamiliar with geospatial technology and to address technology leaders and investors about the power of place. We need to broaden out who we address to make the ideas of location ubiquitous. We spend too much energy on the technical side. (I’ll add: We spend too much time talking to ourselves!)

A: Zeiss: Use 3D to help people “get it.”