[GRASSLIST:9053] Re: ArcView vs GRASS

[Patton, Eric]

 <snip>

> ESRI still holds the marketing edge with the perception of creating
stunning maps, which captures the attention of end-users.

Oh, at the government level, absolutely, it's all about creating an
excellent cartographic product. Pretty pictures do matter.

I agree with the arguments of Grass supporters here, and particularly with
this last statement. The ability to crank out maps quickly on a Windows
machine using ArcGIS is the main reason I think ArcGIS is used so much at my
organization. Once the Grass plugins are up and running in Windows QGIS, I
think a real case can be made for using Grass/QGIS as a mapping tool of
choice. Our cartography standards consist of a 64-page pdf document
specifying the EXACT placement of cartographic elements, point sizes of
fonts, etc, and implementing these protocols for even one A-series map (one
of our standard production maps) in ps.map would be a nightmare. At the
moment I don't get to decide what operating system I use on a government
workstation (although I'm working on that), so I am forced to use
Windows/ArcGIS for production mapping at the moment. From what I've seen
from the cartography capabilities of QGIS, I'm pretty impressed, though. I'm
eagerly looking forward to any developments on the Windows side of QGIS.


~ Eric.