Changes between Version 2 and Version 3 of MapServervsArcIMS
- Timestamp:
- Jan 27, 2009, 2:14:27 PM (15 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
MapServervsArcIMS
v2 v3 17 17 18 18 Thank you to: 19 19 {{{ 20 20 Andrea Goethals, University of Florida 21 21 John Hockaday, Department of Environment, Australia … … 23 23 Michael Anderson, Spatial Information Technologies, Inc. 24 24 Chris Stuber, Silicon Mapping Solutions, Inc 25 25 }}} 26 26 Mapserver-users (MSU) responses were detailed and informative, while the other three forums responded with a resounding silence. 27 27 28 MSU unanimously acclaims Mapserver as the better web-based gis map server, however it was pointed out the problem domains of Mapserver and ArcIMS? overlap while ArcIMS?has a broader functionality set. In the words of Micheal Anderson:28 MSU unanimously acclaims !MapServer as the better web-based gis map server, however it was pointed out the problem domains of !MapServer and !ArcIMS overlap while !ArcIMS has a broader functionality set. In the words of Micheal Anderson: 29 29 30 "...I would like to point out that the scope of what ArcIMS?and31 MapServer attempt to do is different. ArcIMS?has several32 components designed to do things that MapServer alone doesn't30 "...I would like to point out that the scope of what !ArcIMS and 31 MapServer attempt to do is different. !ArcIMS has several 32 components designed to do things that !MapServer alone doesn't 33 33 address. This includes html and applet based viewers for the client 34 34 as well as several components on the server. The components on the … … 42 42 handle increased loads. It also allows you to use COM and Cold 43 43 Fusion in your application as the "connector" between the web server 44 and application server. ArcIMS?has two additional components that44 and application server. !ArcIMS has two additional components that 45 45 start and stop processes and delete images on a schedule. 46 46 47 MapServer alone is only analogous to the spatial server, but the47 !MapServer alone is only analogous to the spatial server, but the 48 48 other features can be added using other tools. Other than being 49 able to use fewer data formats, MapServer is a better spatial server49 able to use fewer data formats, !MapServer is a better spatial server 50 50 than ArcIMS?'s. By using an existing web application server you can 51 51 get the additional functionality with a minimal amount of work." … … 56 56 additional functionality with a minimal amount of work. I am using 57 57 Zope, which is Python based, as my application server. It is also 58 Open Source. It is a much better application server than the ArcIMS?58 Open Source. It is a much better application server than the !ArcIMS 59 59 component. In addition to allowing you to distribute your 60 60 application, and pool machines, it also handles user authentication, 61 61 and gives Unix like permissions to files, URLs, and operations. It 62 62 also handles publishing the sites easily. I haven't gotten around to 63 using it to make the map files or the web site though. I use ArcView?63 using it to make the map files or the web site though. I use !ArcView 64 64 to make the map files and have someone else make the web site. Zope 65 65 does allow me to share single html and JavaScript files across 66 66 multiple web sites, which makes maintenance a lot easier. It is also 67 possible to use Zope as a connector to ArcIMS?so a single68 application could use both MapServer and ArcIMS?(as well as other67 possible to use Zope as a connector to !ArcIMS so a single 68 application could use both !MapServer and !ArcIMS (as well as other 69 69 GIS engines). I am also aware of a Java based application server 70 70 called Enhydra that is also Open Source. I have installed it, but 71 71 haven't had much time to use it, so I can't really say what it can 72 72 do. There are also commercial application servers available like 73 IBM's WebSphere?. You could probably do a lot with Cold Fusion as73 IBM's !WebSphere. You could probably do a lot with Cold Fusion as 74 74 well. 75 75 76 76 "That said, here is my 2 cents on the advantages and disadvantages 77 of ArcIMS?:77 of !ArcIMS: 78 78 79 "Advantages of ArcIMS?79 "Advantages of !ArcIMS 80 80 * distribute applications over multiple machines 81 81 * Native integration with the Geography Network. MapServer can be made to work within the geography network. … … 85 85 * You don't have to try to sell a relatively unknown product (MapServer) and philosophy (Open Source) 86 86 87 "Disadvantages of ArcIMS?87 "Disadvantages of !ArcIMS 88 88 * speed (even running mapserv as regular cgi it is much faster) 89 89 * resource hog 90 90 * limited OS (no Linux) 91 * less stable. My ArcIMS?experience is on NT so that may be more a reflection of the OS than ArcIMS?.91 * less stable. My !ArcIMS experience is on NT so that may be more a reflection of the OS than ArcIMS?. 92 92 * poorer support 93 93 * source code unavailable 94 94 * cost" 95 95 96 All respondants felt Mapserver's support (via the user community) and documentation is much more useful than ArcIMS?'. It was noted that often questions re:ArcIMS?went completely unanswered. A couple of people made the point that although Mapserver's documentation is better there are still some gaping holes; it is expected the newly formed documentation committee and mailing list will help address this issue.96 All respondants felt !MapServer's support (via the user community) and documentation is much more useful than ArcIMS?'. It was noted that often questions re:!ArcIMS went completely unanswered. A couple of people made the point that although Mapserver's documentation is better there are still some gaping holes; it is expected the newly formed documentation committee and mailing list will help address this issue. 97 97 98 Several said Mapserver is easier to install and the maps are easier to maintain.98 Several said !MapServer is easier to install and the maps are easier to maintain. 99 99 100 Most everybody said that Mapserver is faster* although theoretically this should not be the case since Mapserver is a CGI while ArcIMS? is a Java app. (*nobody claimed ArcIMS?is faster, just not everybody made a speed comparison)100 Most everybody said that !MapServer is faster* although theoretically this should not be the case since Mapserver is a CGI while !ArcIMS is a Java app. (*nobody claimed !ArcIMS is faster, just not everybody made a speed comparison) 101 101 102 Those that made reliabilty comparisons felt that ArcIMS?is still buggy and undependable.102 Those that made reliabilty comparisons felt that !ArcIMS is still buggy and undependable. 103 103 104 The one* plus ArcIMS? seems to have over Mapserver is the GUI that allows development of the interface and equivalent to map files. There is an ArcView?extension and an Arc AML which make producing Mapserver map files easier but they are still in development. There is also talk of developing a standalone map builder but I'm not sure how far along that project is yet. (*where the problem domains overlap)104 The one* plus !ArcIMS seems to have over !MapServer is the GUI that allows development of the interface and equivalent to map files. There is an !ArcView extension and an Arc AML which make producing Mapserver map files easier but they are still in development. There is also talk of developing a standalone map builder but I'm not sure how far along that project is yet. (*where the problem domains overlap) 105 105 106 There were incidental threads comparing Mapserver to MapXtreme, and JShape where Mapserver also came out on top.106 There were incidental threads comparing !MapServer to !MapXtreme, and JShape where !MapServer also came out on top. 107 107 108 Thanks to everybody who responded and a note to those who didn't: I'm quite willing to do this again. I'm disappointed nobody came to bat for ArcIMS?. I was hoping to be able to summarize a broader range of opinions. Than again, maybe it is simply true that Mapserver is better than ArcIMS?.108 Thanks to everybody who responded and a note to those who didn't: I'm quite willing to do this again. I'm disappointed nobody came to bat for !ArcIMS. I was hoping to be able to summarize a broader range of opinions. Than again, maybe it is simply true that !MapServer is better than !ArcIMS. 109 109 110 110 cheers,