... this town in Germany isn't on "their radar" :wink:
0 Replies
Pitter
1
Reply
Mon 28 Aug, 2006 12:07 pm
I found another. It´s much more detailed in supplying placenames (but no better resolution): flashearth.com.
0 Replies
NickFun
1
Reply
Mon 28 Aug, 2006 01:15 pm
I hope they do increase the resolution. I want a better view of that gal in Japan sunbathing nude on her roof.
0 Replies
Raener
1
Reply
Sun 29 Oct, 2006 08:03 am
Man I've got the same problem can't find any nudist beaches >_<
Yeah they have been upgrading their images as my town in London wasn't clear before but now is pretty good. I think they'll be focusing on major towns and cities first and expanding outwards from them. So for now the further away you ar from a major city the longer it is till your town may appear in a better resolution. I could be wrong..
Good luck,
P.S if anyone is wondering.. There is NO way of downloading a Google Pro/Plus version and using it to log in. This is becuase when you log in you go through Yahoo! servers which would mean tracking you would be a breeze. If you want the Pro/Plus features prepare to spend $400.
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Sun 29 Oct, 2006 08:17 am
I bought the plus version - from the start onwards - for $15, I think.
Actually now it is
0 Replies
John Ramires
1
Reply
Thu 23 Nov, 2006 06:45 am
flashearth.com -- I like it
0 Replies
John Ramires
1
Reply
Thu 23 Nov, 2006 07:00 am
The question is: how often they re-new pictures?
0 Replies
NickFun
1
Reply
Thu 23 Nov, 2006 10:06 am
Also, the pictures on Google Earth are getting pretty old. I can see my car parked in its space in Boston but I haven't lived there for over 2 years.
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Thu 23 Nov, 2006 10:10 am
NickFun wrote:
Also, the pictures on Google Earth are getting pretty old. I can see my car parked in its space in Boston but I haven't lived there for over 2 years.
How often, do you think it should be re-newed?
And how much would you be willing to pay to see your latest car?
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Sun 26 Nov, 2006 06:38 am
NickFun wrote:
Also, the pictures on Google Earth are getting pretty old. I can see my car parked in its space in Boston but I haven't lived there for over 2 years.
Google Earth keeps London up to date but other cities have an image problem
Vanessa Thorpe, arts and media correspondent
Sunday November 26, 2006
The Observer
The long battle between London and the capital's rival provincial cities is being fought on new territory: the internet.
While the Google Earth research tool, introduced internationally a year and a half ago, features up-to-date images of London, complete with sights such as the new Wembley stadium and the tower at 30 St Mary Axe, better known as the Gherkin, Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham are still pictured without their most recent architectural landmarks.
Google Earth uses satellite photography to create 3D maps of places, allowing users to zoom in on pictures of their own back garden or office building. But the website is also now used widely by tourists planning holiday trips and business people checking urban regeneration.
Google Earth boasts that its images are updated at least every three years and yet, while the new Arsenal football stadium - completed this year - is clearly visible in north London, in Liverpool the roofing work is shown as still under way on the city's central Lime Street railway station. 'This work took place between 2000 and 2001, which means the images are at least five years old,' said Jenny Douglas, planning director of Liverpool Vision, the city's urban regeneration company.
Images in Manchester may also have been taken as long ago as five years. There is no Urbis centre, no stylish One Piccadilly apartment block, no City of Manchester Stadium, which was completed for the 2002 Commonwealth Games.
In Birmingham the new Bull Ring is not visible and the city's marketing team is not pleased. 'It would be great if Google Earth could be updated more frequently, so that people can see the fantastic changes,' said Neil Rami, the chief executive of Marketing Birmingham.
Liverpool, which marks its 800th anniversary as a city next year, is facing a battle to win over hearts and minds before it takes up its role as Capital of Culture. 'Google Earth is a fantastic search engine I use all the time,' said Douglas. 'That is what makes it really disappointing that it seems so out of date. '
The city has undergone dramatic changes in the past two years, with £3.5bn invested or promised, and there are currently 36 tower cranes on the skyline, indicating the level of building work.
'Sites like the waterfront development and the new shopping centre have got so much going on, and the search engine will be getting so many hits, with the birthday coming up, it seems a shame to show how it was in 2001,' added Douglas.
Rachel Whetstone, a spokeswoman for Google, said that the site relies on third-party external companies to provide their pictures. 'We can only update things as soon as we have the data,' she said. 'We want to give people the best service we can, and so not doing it for London just because we can't do it for other cities would seem wrong.'
0 Replies
Pitter
1
Reply
Sun 26 Nov, 2006 07:35 pm
Very interesting article. As to the "third-party external companies to provide their pictures", I wonder who they are.
0 Replies
John Ramires
1
Reply
Tue 28 Nov, 2006 06:01 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
NickFun wrote:
Also, the pictures on Google Earth are getting pretty old. I can see my car parked in its space in Boston but I haven't lived there for over 2 years.
How often, do you think it should be re-newed?
And how much would you be willing to pay to see your latest car?
Emm, I think that they can re-new pictures at least each 24 hours... The problem is -- I don't know in which way they get it. But if pictures are pretty old, so there will be less people, who'll pay money for this service...
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Tue 28 Nov, 2006 06:19 am
John Ramires wrote:
Emm, I think that they can re-new pictures at least each 24 hours... The problem is -- I don't know in which way they get it. But if pictures are pretty old, so there will be less people, who'll pay money for this service...
You think, every point of the earth is photographed in high resolution in than 24 hours?
(You do know that there are still some spots which never ever have been covered at all - at least by sources, civilians can get :wink: )