Talk:Virtual globe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Earthsim[edit]

I have today reinstated Earthsim to the article as I believe this system does meet the definition of a virtual globe exactly as defined by Willem. Earthsim is fully 3D and allows the user to freely move around the virtual environment (rotation, zoom and panning). Simon531

In that sense the definition by Willem is actually lacking and my previous version was indeed better, even though it was more technical. Earthsim does not support adjustment of altitude, pitch, and yaw, or does it? Zoom as such is not an adjustment of altitude, zoom is an adjustment of the field of view to a more narrow or more wide field of view which gives the perception of lower or higher altitude. 64North 04:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, in reply to my own reply, Google Earth doesn't support adjustments in yaw either. So I suppose we will have to limit it to adjustments in altitude and pitch. 64North 04:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Earthsim actually support changes in altitude, pitch and yaw. The camera may, within sensible bounds, be positioned at any arbitrary location in space and orientated to point to any other arbitrary location. Simon531
Thanks for clearing that up Simon, I downloaded the actual app myself and had a look as well. Sorry for not having done so in the first place before I previously removed Earthsim. 64North 18:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of a Virtual Globe[edit]

Willem was so kind as to update the definition of a virtual globe. Please use this entry to discuss the definition and its application to sites that should or should not be included in the Virtual Globe Wikipedia entry. I have today removed a flash based earth viewer as well as EarthSim from the article as I feel that those are not virtual globes as currently defined. I do beleive the current definition is accurate and reasonable. Perhaps FlashEarth and EarthSim and others like it deserve their own category/article, as there are certainly a number of those kind of applications around. However, if we can agree that in order to qualify as a virtual globe, the user needs to be able to freely move around the virtual environment, then anything other then that should not be included in the article. 64North 18:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Willem's definition might be an improvement over previous definitions but at the very least it needs referencing to show that this definition is generally agreed upon. My own opinion is that a virtual globe encompasses a far wider range of globes than the current definition allows, including some of the globes that have been removed. Unless a definition is widely agreed upon - and agreed by parties other than the editiors of this page then a more inclusive approach is surely preferable to the user. And unless there is an industry or publicly recognised definition of a virtual globe, then it brings the npov of the definition into question. Editors of this page should be wary of making the definition themselves rather than reporting an existing, de-facto, publicly or industry recognised definition. I agree that 2D representations cannot count because they are maps rather than globes - but from the most simple viewpoint, any 3D representation of a globe in a virtual space qualifies as a virtual globe regardless of its technological features. Bear in mind that this page should not cover only virtual reality globes or virtual planets - each of which are perhaps subcategories of virtual globes. With the current narrow definition and the various sections of the page such as types the definition is no longer coherent with the content. It might also be worth noting that the external links to pages about virtual globes contain content which 64North has removed because it no longer fits the new definition. Although a third party web page is no sign of a npov, it does at least show that some of the removed content is considered by others as valid. My proposition is that some of the removed references are valid and that the definition should be re-written to be broad and inclusive with virtual planets given a special consideration and their own section as a special case of virtual globes. Without references or consensus, it is fair to say that there appear to be a number of differing opinions as to what constitutes a virtual globe. My suggestion is that a broad definition would be more useful to the user with emphasis on the page given to classification rather than inclusion or exclusion according to features. magnato 29 November 2006

World Wind vs. Google Earth[edit]

The features section - World Wind can do many of those items, and more, with addons/plugins. I'm not sure what GE can do but I know it has the KML addon ability.

Therefore, should it be mentioned that World Wind can do such things with addons? I did this for the GPS section, and linked to the addon page, but I'm not sure if it should stay.

TheBeansprout 13:28, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The History? Snow Crash what?[edit]

The use of virtual globe software was widely popularized by (and may have been first described in) Neal Stephenson's famous science-fiction novel Snow Crash. In the metaverse in Snow Crash there is a piece of software called Earth (just like Google's), made by the Central Intelligence Corporation. The CIC uses their virtual globe as a user interface for keeping track of all their geospatial data, including maps, architectural plans, weather data, and data from real-time satellite surveillance.

Come on, did the movie Jurassic Park popularized the Connection Machines? Other than some geeks, how many people have ever read or heard of Snow Crash? Could such a small, small, small, itsy-bitsy thing affect the design of software?

The above claim is simply ridiculous. – Toytoy 03:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is an excellent section in The Dreams Our Stuff Is Made Of where Thomas Disch catalogs the massive impact of Snow Crash on science fiction and popular culture in general. --Coolcaesar 06:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also I'll dig up some cites when I have the time but I'm so damned busy this week. --Coolcaesar 06:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Itsy-bitsy things my affect the development of nice software gear... There is a company called blaxxun, http://www.blaxxun.com (remember "the black sun"). They got their idea from the book Snow Crash. They are specialized in the field of virtual environments and multi-user platforms. --Rudgen 09:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparisons: Google Earth Updates[edit]

Google Earth updated its satellite images. Bora Bora is now available in very high resolution. This section and the comparison images should be updated.

--Peace01234 01:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft's Virtual Earth as a Virtual Globe?[edit]

This article should tell why Microsoft is not considered as an Online virtual globe. It's strange that MS Virtual Earth is mentioned several times in this virtual globe article, but never said to be or not a virtual globe. Precisions would be welcomed to reduce the confusion.

--Lordsatri 21:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. Why is Microsoft Virtual Earth considered a virtual globe? To be honest, Microsoft MapPoint is more like Microsofts version of a virtual globe. Jarl (talk) 09:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

huh? And why is apple considered a fruit? Virtual Earth 3D is a virtual globe, it fits into the definition from the article without problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.254.131.24 (talk) 17:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this article needs help[edit]

I went ahead and removed all 2D references. I also added a what I perceive to be a more precise definition of a virtual globe. Just because someone is able to overlay an image over what looks like a rotating globe in some Java application doesn't make it a virtual globe. In the definition I added I suggest that in order to qualify as virtual globe the user must be able to freely move about the 3D environment.

Also, I would like to move away from a GE vs WW vs the rest, and simply state the capabilities and uses of virtual globes (without that it turns into advertising for specific solutions.

Time is of course precious, and I won't have any to work on any major edits till well into September. --64North 16:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are still some GMaps articles with Category:Virtual Globe. --83.24.222.128 12:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. Personally I won't be editing any other articles on WP, I barely have time for this one. ;) But I do want to expand on this one because there is a whole lot more that can be said and is useful info at the same time. Virtual globes are the future for a great many different uses. Thanks to Google Earth they have essentially become mainstream, and now users are less intimidated to check out some other VG products that are perhaps more feature-rich than GE. 64North 17:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Chart too big[edit]

The chart used to illustrate the differences between the 3 is too large and goes past the edge of the screen. When I resized it to 100% though (didn't save the change, just previewed it), it made everything look all squeezed together though. Perhaps it should be split into another chart row? (Cardsplayer4life 08:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Now it's horizontal, it would look much better if it was vertical. And there is no need in adding detailed minor features (there were two similar modes in the table - Telescope/Sky view and local sky view, do we really need them both? also first table got 'High Resolution location fotos', whereas this info is in the second table too...). Keep the table as simple as possible, with only major and most used functions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.24.188.169 (talk) 19:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Smk 3dwg.png[edit]

Image:Smk 3dwg.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poor man's virtual globe[edit]

Back in the days of Win3.1 to Win95, there was a quick and handy little virtual 3D globe called "On Top of the World" (author Adrian Hlynka). I believe the last version was 2.00f (1996) and was just over 2 MB zipped.

I'm wondering if anyone knows where it can still be found (for those of us with pre-2000 PCs) It was cartoonish, but it had info on cities, rivers, and other geographic features, as well as real-time night shading, aerial and flight angles, political vs physical texturing, and a small fact book. Thanks for any info --192.75.95.127 10:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC) (rAS).[reply] 

 Let's say http://ulozto.cz/xyy7ryu4/virtual-globe-ontopful-zip . It surely works under Windows XP (in compatibility mode for Windows95). Great for orientation where is which city/country/island/mountain/airport etc., for distance measurements over globe, daylight tracking, timezone check etc. 193.85.229.12 (talk) 12:43, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Marble (KDE) is available for any of the mayor platforms, although it's made for KDE (GNU/Linux). But you can find a windows download here. I don't know which are it's requirements. JunCTionS 15:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Earthsim etv.jpg[edit]

Image:Earthsim etv.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Virtual Earth 3D.png[edit]

The image Image:Virtual Earth 3D.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Earth3D[edit]

I'm amazed that Earth3D doesn't yet exist in Wikipedia. And I guess it should be part of this article. I'll try to add it, I believe it's relevant (it's part of many linux repositories, and it seems to be the only open source virtual globe to have satellite imagery)JunCTionS 15:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biased Comparison[edit]

The Comparison section reminded me of a wonderful, wonderful, [Onion article|http://www.theonion.com/content/infograph/os_x_snow_leopard_vs_windows], where Mac's 'Snow Lepard' was compared to windows 7. Especially, 'Pre-installed image of a snow leopard? Snow leopard: Yes, Windows 7: No'.

Let me be more clear. I've noticed that all of the options are a 'yes' for Google Earth, with the exception of 3 'no's and a 3 'some's. With the other globes, there's more of a balance of 'yes' and 'no'. This table is heavily biased towards Google Earth, and that should be fixed -either by removing some of options that are only on google Earth, adding some of the other globe's info- or just getting rid of the table all together. bob bobato (talk) 15:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uniform linking in list of online virtual globes[edit]

It frustrates me that the the wikilink for Software MacKiev's 3D Weather Globe & Atlas links to a wikipage that describes the company and not for the software. I suggest that a wikipage page for this software is created and this article wikilinks to that wikipage. Jarl (talk) 09:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WorldWind Java[edit]

This article (and indeed, the worldwind article itself) doesn't really do much in the way of take into account WorldWind Java which has a different feature set from the regular WorldWind as I understand it. 193.63.128.50 (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OSSIM Planet[edit]

Is there any reason that ossimPlanet is not included? --Goatbar (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NASA World Wind Flight Sim[edit]

The comparison table says NASA World Wind has no flight sim but I've found this: http://www.disti.com/Products/demonstrations/java.html I don't know how the table code works but maybe someone could change it to a 'yes'... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.163.97 (talk) 06:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Virtual globe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:57, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Virtual globe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding CesiumJS[edit]

Hello, everyone

I'd like to ask about CesiumJS. People added CesiumJS into the list several times but they have been reverted by the reason of non-notability.

I think CesiumJS is one of the well-known open source software to render the virtual globe. It has been developed actively about 10 years and there are various software created ba CesiumJS. Because of that, I think it is enough famous to be listed. I'd like to know if it is appropriate for the list.

some references:

Thank you. shuuji3 (talk) 15:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Virtual_globe&oldid=1208379158"