LI 2006 - A convergence

LI 2006 seemed to me a convergence of sorts. As the conference chairman, my opinion is obviously biased but my subjective observation is that the event had a similar feel to the original Business Geographics conference in 1993. At that event, geospatial software providers and geographic data vendors met, networked and produced some startling partnerships thereafter. I would suggest that LI 2006 could produce similar results.

Vendors and attendees represented an eclectic mix of technology perspectives. From Immersive Media to Planet 9 Studios to Lucent Technologies, there were some very interesting people roaming the floor. From traditional mapping to mashups, you could not help but see cross pollenization taking place. I’d have to say that if there was a successful conclusion to the event, the reason would be the ability for a variety of technologists to come together in one, neutral venue and talk about their plans to make money with location technology.

Geoff Zeis from Autodesk suggested to me that the conference represented an ‘infection point’ in the industry. I’m too close to the situation to offer an opinion one way or another. In any technology adoption curve there are inflection points, growth, maturity, but then some other catatlyst must enter to create another inflection point in order for trends to be sustained. I’d like to think that we offered an opportunity for growth to continue and where on the adoption curve we are now is hard to judge. But suffice to say, we will try to break the mold again next year and offer more opportunities to continue the discussion.

A Few Bloggers on Location Intelligence Conference

Geoff Zeiss found that the event “confirmed to me what I suggested in my last blog, that the geospatial industry is undergoing a period of major transformation.”
Between the Poles

Rafe Needleman of c|net popped in to visit with Placebase. He notes that it offers different licensing than Google, and does not have the “bandwidth limitations Google puts on maps used in mashups.”
Alpha (the c|net blog)

Greg Sterling, whose blog covers the media, notes “I don’t even think the folks at the conference are themselves totally aware of all the possibilities.” He’s right.
Screenwerk

Ed Parsons summarizes a panel in which he participated and notes, “the mash-up session felt like a similar session 10 years ago, when the same applications were developed using the first generation of desktop GIS, the technology has changed but the commercial markets are the same ?”
EdParsons.com

Finally, Jim Steiner from Oracle was good enough to share his notes on the event at Directions Magazine.

API Providers Eating their Own Dogfood

The open and commercial API offerings have some parallels to APIs in desktop and other products. Some companies offer APIs for use and commercialization to third parties in addition to building on the APIs themselves. For example, ESRI offers many extensions built on its API and engages many partners to do so. GlobeXplorer offers its imagery as a Web service and uses it as the basis of its Property Analyst (a paid service).

It will be interesting to see if the API providing organizations continue to build on their APIs or look for more partners. Microsoft seems to be actively looking for partners for its API. Other players, so far as I can tell, as standing by to see what happens.

How many of the same mashup?

I think I saw no fewer than three versions of tools to measure distance for runners/walkers/cyclists illustrated during the conference. I found an early one (Google Maps Pedometer) and use that exclusively. I consider the rest “also rans.” (heh heh) It will be interesting to see how many of these sites (free or otherwise) will be around in a year.

Switching from Free Mapping API to Free Mapping API

I spoke with more than one vendor at Location Intelligence who after showing off an app using one API was quick to say, “Yeah and we might offer it on a different one, too.” That suggests a few things to me: at least some of the platforms are “interchangeable enough” for that to occur, there’s some reason (licensing restrictions, customer preference, other) that would drive developers to change, and developers are taking the time to keep up with lengthening list of open mapping API offerings.