[Aust-NZ] GIS is dead

[Tim Bowden]

On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 07:21 +0800, Chris Tweedie wrote:
> Heard them all before Tim. All i can say is that if i had 5c for every
> generic IT Specialist claiming they know everything about internet mapping
> because they can put pushpins onto google maps i would be a very rich man.

Sure, and by and large they don't actually know much about spatial, but
that's the whole point.  If we are to be successful in letting spatial
be an integrated part of the wider IT environment, then we need to deal
with that.  Our tools need to protect the innocent from the typical GIS
type traps we know all to well (at least as much as reasonably possible)
so that enterprises can maximise the value of the spatial component of
their data.  We need to reduce the specialist skills needed to make that
happen.  That doesn't devalue what GIS specialist can offer, rather it
maximises the value of spatial data to non spatial people.

> GIS is also a really bad term holistically as it encompasses so many
> different areas such as remote sensing, geodesy, spatial statistics, spatial
> databases, internet mapping, programming ... the list goes on. Just because
> Joe Blogs can now do limited "internet mapping" certainly does not make GIS
> dead and its easy to see this when you trawl the Google Maps Group.

Ok, as I said, the claim GIS is dead is a little tongue in cheek, but
the share of the spatial pie that traditional GIS occupies is rapidly
shrinking.  That's not because GIS is becoming less useful, but because
the pie is getting much bigger quite quickly, and the growth is mostly
coming from non traditional areas.  It's also a business viewpoint
rather than a tech viewpoint.  If you're following the money, you're
probably not looking at traditional GIS solutions so much anymore.  If
you're following the tech, then you'll see GIS tools being rapidly
developed and used in new and exciting ways, and would have a hard time
seeing it as dead.

Regards,
Tim 

> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aust-nz-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> [mailto:aust-nz-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bowden
> Sent: Monday, 8 October 2007 9:14 PM
> To: Aust-NZ OSGeo
> Subject: Re: [Aust-NZ] GIS is dead
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 09:09 +1000, Bruce.Bannerman at dpi.vic.gov.au wrote:
> > 
> > Tim, 
> > 
> > IMO: 
> > 
> > 
> > In a world of climate change and water shortage issues just begging
> > for some good spatial/image/temporal analysis, I find it difficult to
> > understand that 'GIS is Dead'. 
> > 
> 
> Ok, so the GIS is dead claim is a little tongue in cheek, but only
> slightly.  If we look at traditional GIS, we see a bunch of tools that
> are designed for use by highly trained experts.  We see vendors creating
> GIS ecosystems that are closed environments; "walled in gardens" for
> want of a better expression, that try and limit interoperability with
> other vendors tools.  We see a big disconnect between GIS systems and
> general IT systems.
> 
> Now compare that to what's happening in the wider spatial world.  Google
> maps and similar offerings (for all the technical shortcomings of the
> various systems) have helped create a mindset change about how spatial
> data is being used.  The big advances in integrating spatial data into
> everyday IT systems mostly isn't coming from companies like ESRI.  If
> you want to have a look at what's happening, you're better of turning to
> companies like Nokia, who are taking spatial data and integrating it
> into everyday systems.
> 
> There are people doing "GIS" now who haven't even heard the term.  Think
> accountants doing spatial analysis on asset management systems,
> insurance brokers doing spatial risk analysis, transport managers using
> mapping capabilities build into their scheduling software.  They don't
> know what GIS is, and they don't need to know.  They just need the tools
> that allow them to make use of the spatial data they have, and that's
> happening.  Look at the spatial capabilities of python, java, perl or
> whatever your favourite development environment is.  All the standard
> "GIS" capabilities are available there.  It's our responsibility as
> "GIS" professionals to try and make these tools as "idiot proof" as
> possible, and help guide people in the best use of them, but for good or
> ill, there are probably more people using them who don't know GIS than
> who do.  There will increasingly be more spatial activity outside the
> traditional GIS space than inside it.
> 
> OK, so mostly it's not high end GIS analysis by any means, but that type
> of integration between spatial data and general IT systems is where most
> of the action is, rather than traditional GIS. In other words, we're
> seeing spatial become just another component of enterprise solutions.
> Traditional proprietary GIS vendors from what I've seen by and large
> haven't moved with the times (ok, I'm thinking of one vendor in
> particular here...).  They're still pushing the "walled in garden"
> closed ecosystem, which doesn't make for a good enterprise spatial data
> management approach.  Enterprise solutions need to be able to manipulate
> data using any number of tools, and have the data available in open
> accessible formats.  Spatial data then becomes just another attribute in
> bigger enterprise wide data sets, rather than being in a separate
> specialised system that only GIS experts can access.
> 
> That's why traditional GIS is "dead".  
> 
> Sure, there will always be a need for specialist GIS services, but heavy
> analysis tools are increasingly going to be a smaller and smaller part
> of the spatially enabled enterprise solution set.
> 
> 
> Anyone want to chip in on this?  If you think I'm wrong, I'd like to
> know!
> 
> Regards,
> Tim
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Aust-NZ mailing list
> Aust-NZ at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/aust-nz
> 
>