[postgis-users] A bit off topic, but FOSS GIS clients...

[David Garbin]

For what it's worth, I've found uDig's performance awesome on  
shapefiles under OSX.  Nothing else I've tried comes close.  I'm  
working on getting it to link with my PostGIS implementation.

On Dec 31, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Obe, Regina wrote:

> As Frank said - this is probably more appropriate for QGIS or OSGEO
> list.  Anyrate I'll offer my two cetns.
>
> What is your idea of tiny shapefiles or moderate size.  From  
> experience
> loading shape files in QGIS, they seem to load fairly fast - files
> around 5MB - 20 MB. Granted the filtering capabilities could be
> improved.  I haven't used uDig enough to comment.
>
> Are you loading across a network or locally.  I would expect if you  
> put
> the data in PostGIS and you are accessing via a network, you should
> notice some improvement,but compared to local shapefiles, it will be
> comparable or worse.
>
> --Am I mistaken, or is FOSS GIS weakest when it comes to
> the non-web based GIS client arena? No you are not.  I think FOSS  
> GIS is
> still strongest in web based stuff.  As far as GIS client stuff, it is
> still behind the commercial products.
>
> --Why don't all these clients unite?
> That's a difficult question and one I have thought about myself. I  
> think
> it's a pretty multi-dimensional question.
> a) As Frank has said they do unite usually on more micro levels  
> (Which I
> think is pretty neat and not as often seen in Commercial products) -
> e.g. you see Geos, GDAL, JTS, Proj, OpenLayers, Grass used in numerous
> disjoint projects.  So when they unite its often at a very granular
> level (which as a mere user you may not be privy to) which I tend to
> think is way better than at a higher macro level.
>
> b) Uniting at a macro level is often trickier and not as useful in my
> opinion.  At the macro level you are beginning to talk about big  
> stoves.
> To join two big stove projects into one presumes everyone wants the  
> same
> thing out of a GIS desktop client.  If I were developing a java app, I
> would guess integrating uDig components would be far easier than using
> QGIS.  If I wanted something to integrate with say MS Access or some
> other activex way - MapWindow would fit nicely.  If I was doing .NET
> client SharpMap would be a nice fit.
>
> From a newbie usability standpoint, I find QGIS easier to use, but
> recognize that uDig has a lot of sophisticated functionality that QGIS
> lacks.  Not to mention QGIS is QT based and uDig is java-based. If  
> these
> were to unite, I think it would be really tricky to not alienate one
> group of users and programmers.
>
> Personally I find ESRI stuff really hard to use for doing statistical
> analysis among other things so I guess I better not voice my opinions
> too loudly about what I think of ESRI offerings compared to other
> commercial/FOSS offerings out there.
>
> Hope that helps,
> Regina
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
> [mailto:postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of  
> dnrg
> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 10:41 AM
> To: postgis postgis
> Subject: [postgis-users] A bit off topic, but FOSS GIS clients...
>
> This is off-topic. But since many use
> PostGIS/PostgreSQL as a spatial database backend, I
> thought people here may be best equipped to comment. I
> couldn't be the only one wondering about this.
>
> Quantum GIS is painfully slow rendering and searching
> through data in moderately sized, and evidently even
> tiny, shapefiles. That's *with* scale-dependent
> display set to reasonable values.
>
> Seems QGIS is a decade or more behind even ArcView 3.2
> (still a great product after all these years) with
> regard to performance and basic (non-OGC and web)
> functionality.
>
> Will importing the shapefiles into PostgreSQL solve
> the data access speed issues? Is the rendering engine
> itself problematic, or is the slowness a function of
> its inability to work efficiently with shapefiles?
>
> I find QGIS simply unusable when working with
> shapefiles. Considering many GIS novices still work
> with shapefiles, I'm guessing the lack of
> an efficient FOSS GIS client will stall wider adoption
> of FOSS GIS.
>
> Am I mistaken, or is FOSS GIS weakest when it comes to
> the non-web based GIS client arena?
>
> I seriously want to like QGIS, but am having a tough
> time of that presently. Are there other FOSS GIS
> clients that can access, search through, and render
> shapefile data better than QGIS? I'm presuming,
> perhaps falsely, that uDig is no better in
> non-RDBMS-based spatial data access/render
> performance.
>
> Finally, have the QGIS, uDig, and other folks
> considered joining forces to create a killer GIS
> client? I find it depressing to see many different
> fiefdoms in the FOSS community generally. If several
> projects merged, it could lead to one heck of a FOSS
> software product rather than, perhaps, several
> marginal ones.
>
> One of the beauties of FOSS is that anyone with a
> vision can start a project and attempt to create
> something better than already exists. However, that
> vision may be realized, if ever, at a glacial pace. I
> myself am impatient, and am not a software developer.
> But if I was a developer, I would want to find the
> best FOSS GIS client out there and focus efforts on
> it.
>
> Seems to me if people joined forces more often and
> consolidated projects, QGIS, for instance, might not
> still be choking trying to access, search, and render
> moderately sized shapefiles after 5 years of
> development.
>
> So what gives? At conferences like FOSS4G, is there
> ever talk of project consolidation? If not, why not? I
> tend to think of all the development hours spent on,
> say, 8 FOSS GIS clients, wasted, when, if
> there was focus, 1 or 2 FOSS GIS clients could really
> kick some butt and give commercial products real
> competition.
>
> Why doesn't project consolidation happen often--or not
> often enough? Hurt feelings? Unwillingness to judge
> one product over another?
>
> Have there been no systematic attempts by the
> community to seriously assess what projects are out
> there, find 1 or 2 best of breeds, then encourage the
> focus of development on those?
>
> I appreciate all the work that's been done on QGIS,
> uDig, and others. But I personally would love to see
> more consolidation so we make larger, quicker strides.
>
> Final question--if I import large shapefiles into
> PostgreSQL/PostGIS, and use QGIS or uDig, will my
> speed  and usability gripes be extinguished? Honestly
> can't ever imagine using the latest QGIS with
> shapefiles for more than 10 minutes without wanting
> immediately to uninstall it.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ____________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
> -----------------------------------------
> The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be
> confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure
> pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended
> solely for the addressee. If you received this in error, please
> contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users