Map or Arcview?

[rwatson654]

Looking at the cost difference to use Map 3D or ESRI. We currently own 9
licenses of LD/Civil 3D which include Map. Part of our research has been
from two sources, an ESRI user and Autodesk sales rep. I hope to get
responses from individual who are familiar with Map, and hopefully Arcview.
The following are the justifications for the ESRI products from an ESRI
user, are they true?

Map 3D is very basic. It is essentially a viewing tool. There may be
additional products for AutoDesk which would provide advanced capability. It
is not set up to dovetail with RAS; there would be an intermediate step
required to produce maps from RAS data if an AutoDesk project is used.

All FEMA mapping contractors are using ESRI products as is the rest of the
world. It seems like ESRI is much like Microsoft in the early days.

The ESRI 3D Analyst Extension product would be useful once we start down the
path of manipulating DFIRM data or perhaps for projects where
cross-sectional information would be loaded directly into RAS with the
mapping being generated immediately from the RAS results.

The basic software, ARCVIEW, would allow drainage areas, land use and CNs
to be developed and calculated in hours instead of days with Map. With Map
there is no connectivity between quad sheets, soils maps, land use maps,
aerial photos, but with ARCVIEW there is.

The Map3D learning curve is inefficient, were as ESRI products is much
simpler.

Much of the GIS data which we could use with the ESRI products is FREE! All
that is needed is to download the information. Not so with Map



We did get feedback from our sales rep addressing the above comments as
follows:

Map will perform everything that Arcview and the ESRI 3D Analyst Extension
add on do with the exception of:

- Viewshed and line-of-sight analysis, spot height interpolation, profiling,
and steepest path determination, calculate surface area and volumes. Note
Civil 3D and Land Desktop (both have Map 3D inside of them) will calculate
surface area and volumes.

- VRML support (web publishing via MGE)

- animation recording (additional product needed)

Map is capable of utilizing and exporting to ESRI information. "Supposedly"
there are no translation problems.

Map is capable of performing everything ESRI 3D Analyst Extension does, with
the exceptions listed above, so it should be able to manipulate DFIRM data.
The sectioning capability for Map is done via Land Desktop or Civil 3D.

Map can utilize the same information as Arcview. The calculations can be
done as efficiently as ESRI.

Training for Map is as simple as ESRI products and since you have
individuals that are experienced with Land Desktop/Civil 3D, I would assume
the training for Map 3D would be minimized.

The free stuff for ESRI products is available and usable in Map, see above
for compatibility.

In addition Map has some analysis capabilities via theming using Aspect and
Slope that Arcview and the 3D Analyst Extension do not.


--
Civil 3D/LD/Raster 2009 Update 1
Vista 64 bit
8 gb ram
X9000 @ 2.8 GHz, Core 2 Extreme SP1

[Anonymous]

< Looking at the cost difference to use Map 3D or ESRI. We currently own 9
licenses of LD/Civil 3D which include Map. >

Look at the TOTAL cost of ArcInfo and ArcView licenses then compare the
costs.
If you have C3D/LDT then the only cost is for Map3D training or add-ons to
with RAS/GPS etc.

< Map 3D is very basic. It is essentially a viewing tool. There may be
additional products for AutoDesk which would provide advanced capability. It
is not set up to dovetail with RAS; there would be an intermediate step
required to produce maps from RAS data if an AutoDesk project is used. >

Map3D is more than viewing software, it also edits with precision not only
the geometry but the attributes of the features, and much easier IMHO.
As for RAS there are some add-ons that allow you to work with it in C3D.

< All FEMA mapping contractors are using ESRI products as is the rest of the
world. It seems like ESRI is much like Microsoft in the early days. >

Correct they are using ESRI but they are also using AutoDesk products and
more and more each day. A lot of the Federal contractors would rather use
AutoDesk products if they had the choice (ones that I spoke with) along with
the DOT people. The US Military is starting to phase out the ESRI line for
AutoDesk products.

< The ESRI 3D Analyst Extension product would be useful once we start down
the
path of manipulating DFIRM data or perhaps for projects where
cross-sectional information would be loaded directly into RAS with the
mapping being generated immediately from the RAS results. >

The additional cost for one seat of ESRI 3D Analyst Extension will offset
any cost for the RAS add-ons to Civil3D.


to be developed and calculated in hours instead of days with Map. With Map
there is no connectivity between quad sheets, soils maps, land use maps,
aerial photos, but with ARCVIEW there is. >

The key word in there is VIEW. How much editing can be done with the data?
By the way AutoDesk DWF viewer is free that also allows viewing of the data.

simpler. >

Agree there is a learning curve to using Map3D but there also is one to
ESRI's line of products to an untrained user. A knowledgeable instructor is
the key, don't settle for the closet or cheapest learning center, find an
ATC that has the instructor for MAP3D.

< Much of the GIS data which we could use with the ESRI products is FREE!
All
that is needed is to download the information. Not so with Map >


That same "free" data can be used in AutoCAD Map3D

Again look at the total cost...... not just the cost for ArcGIS Map. That
includes the price of the ,ArcEditor, the publishing & 3D Analyst
Extensions, ArcPad, the yearly maintenances fees and the ESRI developers
network (EDN) fees. Then compare them to your existing Civil3D/LDT and
Map3D cost with the added add-ons, subscription fees, ADN fees. Last look
at what support is available to you.



--
Murph
www.map3d.wordpress.com
(waiting for rebuttal from my friend Tripp)

[rwatson654]

Can you give us the names and contact(s) of any companies or agencies to
discuss Map vs ESRI? The issue for us is more than just cost, though that
is part of it. The order of importance to us is 1. The ability of the
product to perform the necessary tasks to complete project, 2. What we
submit to the agencies will be in an acceptable format, 3. We are compatible
with other companies we are working in conjunction with, 4. We do not appear
as mavericks with the product we are using, 5. Cost

--
Civil 3D/LD/Raster 2009 Update 1
Vista 64 bit
8 gb ram
X9000 @ 2.8 GHz, Core 2 Extreme SP1

[Anonymous]

Email me with your location and I'll provide you with someone to get in
touch with.

jhmATalacadDOTcom

--
Murph
www.map3d.wordpress.com


"rwatson654" wrote in message news:6029241@discussion.autodesk.com...
Can you give us the names and contact(s) of any companies or agencies to
discuss Map vs ESRI? The issue for us is more than just cost, though that
is part of it. The order of importance to us is 1. The ability of the
product to perform the necessary tasks to complete project, 2. What we
submit to the agencies will be in an acceptable format, 3. We are compatible
with other companies we are working in conjunction with, 4. We do not appear
as mavericks with the product we are using, 5. Cost

--
Civil 3D/LD/Raster 2009 Update 1
Vista 64 bit
8 gb ram
X9000 @ 2.8 GHz, Core 2 Extreme SP1

[gdunford]

There are some things that Map can do better then ArcGIS. I use Map to draw foundation plans, I have LDL and use it for creating surfaces. I also have ArcGIS. I use it for maps showing well recharge date, rain fall, and contaminant flow. The data from CAD can be exported into ArcGIS. The data from ArcGIS can be exported as shape files and imported into CAD.

[phmurphy]

I have been using MAP for years and I have been using ArcMAP for the last 2 years with a little ArcView before that.

ArcMap is a lot easier for making a quick map with labels etc. But MAP is a lot easier for putting in line work, cleaning up linework, and making a topology. To be honest, I have not spent a great deal of time trying to figure these same things out in detail in ArcMAP.

As far as being able to export from MAP to ArcMAP, it is easy, but there is still an problem with labels in ArcMAP. You have to use Toolbox>Features>Repair Geometry or your labels are all over the place.

As far as the thought that one or the other is "simple" or "intuitive" - Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. NOT.

Pat

[Anonymous]

If the project has engineering/design component, then Autodesk Technology is the way to go. Imagine porting the data from one platform to the other and vice versa is inconvenient, very dangerous, and not sustainable.

Imagine doing your design and analysis in Civil3D/LDT and immediately sharing the resultant map with GIS is indeed very powerful and convenient.

On top of this, Autodesk provides very rich API. So sharing information form one discipline to the other is very manageable.

If your intention is purely GIS/mapping, then ESRI's is a convenient technology to consider.

Arnel M. Domag
nth geographics and geometrics
nth_gg@yahoo.com

[Anonymous]

I use both Map and ArcGIS. Each is a valuable tool in our GIS toolbox. It is
like comparing two wrenches. Sometimes you need a combination wrench and
sometimes you need a socket wrench. They both do the samething but incertain
instances one might be better than the other for the task at hand.

Map has much easier to use drawing tools and is easy to integrate with our
engineer and surveyors using LDD and Civil 3D. The cleanup tools in Map are
nice as are the FDO connectors. Map also has some builtin 3D tools without
the need of extra extensions. If you have Civil 3D those are even better.
Maps biggest weakness are it's thematics and analysis tools when compare to
other GIS products such as ArcGIS.

ArcGIS has some definent advantages in a strictly GIS analysis area. In myy
opinion the queries, thematics and geoprocessing tools in ArcGIS are by and
far superior to Map's, though Map has been making steady improvements in
these areas. ArcGIS also handles large datasets much better than Map. ArcGIS
also had built in raster tools where Map requires Raster Design. I perfer
ArcGIS's version of topologies to Maps but these require at least ArcEditor.
ArcView will not allow users to create or edit topologies. Since Map is a
single level product it does not have this issue. ArcGIS's biggest weakness
is editing spatial data when compared to a CAD based program.

Both programs will work with multiple data formats either through importing
or a direct connection. Both programs can reproject data from one coordinate
system to another. Both programs can produce high quality prints.

--
Tripp Corbin, MCP, CFM, GISP
Vice President, GIS/IT
ESRI Authorized Instructor
Keck & Wood, Inc.
(678) 417-4013
(678) 417-8785 fax
www.keckwood.com



wrote in message news:6028571@discussion.autodesk.com...
Looking at the cost difference to use Map 3D or ESRI. We currently own 9
licenses of LD/Civil 3D which include Map. Part of our research has been
from two sources, an ESRI user and Autodesk sales rep. I hope to get
responses from individual who are familiar with Map, and hopefully Arcview.
The following are the justifications for the ESRI products from an ESRI
user, are they true?

Map 3D is very basic. It is essentially a viewing tool. There may be
additional products for AutoDesk which would provide advanced capability. It
is not set up to dovetail with RAS; there would be an intermediate step
required to produce maps from RAS data if an AutoDesk project is used.

All FEMA mapping contractors are using ESRI products as is the rest of the
world. It seems like ESRI is much like Microsoft in the early days.

The ESRI 3D Analyst Extension product would be useful once we start down the
path of manipulating DFIRM data or perhaps for projects where
cross-sectional information would be loaded directly into RAS with the
mapping being generated immediately from the RAS results.

The basic software, ARCVIEW, would allow drainage areas, land use and CNs
to be developed and calculated in hours instead of days with Map. With Map
there is no connectivity between quad sheets, soils maps, land use maps,
aerial photos, but with ARCVIEW there is.

The Map3D learning curve is inefficient, were as ESRI products is much
simpler.

Much of the GIS data which we could use with the ESRI products is FREE! All
that is needed is to download the information. Not so with Map



We did get feedback from our sales rep addressing the above comments as
follows:

Map will perform everything that Arcview and the ESRI 3D Analyst Extension
add on do with the exception of:

- Viewshed and line-of-sight analysis, spot height interpolation, profiling,
and steepest path determination, calculate surface area and volumes. Note
Civil 3D and Land Desktop (both have Map 3D inside of them) will calculate
surface area and volumes.

- VRML support (web publishing via MGE)

- animation recording (additional product needed)

Map is capable of utilizing and exporting to ESRI information. "Supposedly"
there are no translation problems.

Map is capable of performing everything ESRI 3D Analyst Extension does, with
the exceptions listed above, so it should be able to manipulate DFIRM data.
The sectioning capability for Map is done via Land Desktop or Civil 3D.

Map can utilize the same information as Arcview. The calculations can be
done as efficiently as ESRI.

Training for Map is as simple as ESRI products and since you have
individuals that are experienced with Land Desktop/Civil 3D, I would assume
the training for Map 3D would be minimized.

The free stuff for ESRI products is available and usable in Map, see above
for compatibility.

In addition Map has some analysis capabilities via theming using Aspect and
Slope that Arcview and the 3D Analyst Extension do not.


--
Civil 3D/LD/Raster 2009 Update 1
Vista 64 bit
8 gb ram
X9000 @ 2.8 GHz, Core 2 Extreme SP1

[Anonymous]

As a user of both ESRI and Map, the one thing that stick out the most here is that map is still AUTOCAD.

Translation: if I need to integrate other AutoCAD drawing from LDD to Architect or MEP into it, I can. Verses ESRI witch requires a conversion.
ESRI still beats AutoCAD in the utilization of .shp files. (.shp is an ESRI creation) in so much that labels are much easier to manipulate and put into place in an automatic mode vs. map 8 which still has a few bugs.

However. when you have people using LDD, Civil, MEP or for that matter anything built up in Inventor and needs to be placed into a civil drawing, it can be done as long as it is still a .dwg format.

The use of ESRI is still predominate in the Federal Gov. world including DoD, BIA, USGS, etc. But simply put, the use of AutoCAD is a wise choice if much of the work is going to be a DWG format.