Microsoft launched a beta version of the
much-awaited MSN Virtual Earth today. It's a Web-based product; no
downloading required as with Google Earth. Indeed, the Web interface and
map/satellite toggle makes this product more directly competitive with Google Maps than with Google Earth. Indeed, the
45-degree aerial photography we have been expecting is completely missing from this versijon of MSN Virtual Earth. If
Microsoft eventually bundles that fabulous looking imagery into a Web-based service, significant waves will rock all
boats. For now, MSN Virtual Earth is a worthy competitor to (and outright imitator of) Google Maps.
For a quick comparison of the look-and-feel of MSN Virtual Earth vs. Google Maps, check the following two links, which
reflect an identical search with similar zoom settings:
MSN Virtual Earth
Google Maps
Note that Google has added a Hybrid button to its Maps/Satellite toggle, quite possibly in quick response to Virtual
Earth's ability to overlay street names on its maps. Google's imagery is marginally clearer and definitely more
colorful than MSN's. Both screens are maximally zoomed in. both sites alzlow local searching and display results in a
similar fashion. MSN has copied Google's excellent draggable maps. MSN's Scratch Pad is a handy feature; the results
can be e-mailed or blogged (to MSN Spaces). Both services provide a distance scale in a bottom corner of the screen—if
I'm not mistaken, this also is a new addition in Google, placed there to keep pace with MSN. (I have many times wished
for that distance scale in Google Maps.)
In short, the two services are nearly identical, and Google appears to be watching Microsoft development closely. I
will continue to use Google Earth if only because of inertia, and because the Scratch Pad isn't enough to pull me to
Microsoft. Be clear about one thing: Virtual Earth is by no means a competitor to Google Earth, though that's what
everyone was expecting. Even if Microsoft supplies superior imagery to this interface, Virtual Earth will still
essentially be a Maps project. Google Earth is distinguished by its smooth fly-over features more than by the quality
of its images. If Microsoft wants to compete in that arena, it will probably have to develop a stand-alone client.
However—if flying, zooming, panning, and tilting could all be bundled into a Web-based interface, that would take the
game to a whole new level.
REVIEW: MSN Virtual Earth
Reader Comments
(Page 1)2. I tried this the day it came out and once again today and I do not like it one bit. It does not work at all for Canada. I can't search near my house or find my house. Once I finaly find my house manually I cannot see it with aerial shoots because they did not do canada in detail at all. On google maps i can do this fine, i can find my house, search around it and zoom in all the way with satellite. so i'm not going to even bother with it again until they decide to expand to the rest of north america.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Trevor Smiley
3. after comparing both products for about an hour, it seems that google's imagery is generally superior. google's is mostly all color, while microsoft's seems to use a lot of black-and-white. microsoft appears to have artificially "colorized" the b&w images to add green to parks, but it's tough to see what's what when it's all b&w. for a great example of this, try to find landmarks in manhattan with both products, and you'll see the difficulty with the msn imagery.
there are some places where msn's imagery is much better than google's. zoom all the way in on san francisco, for example. not only is msn in color, but you can zoom a couple levels closer than with google.
also, google maps does a much better job with driving directions - plots your path right on the map. if you can find driving direction in the microsoft product, it bounces the user out to the old, static mappoint interface. no draggable maps, no high-res.
microsoft does deliver on several cool and useful features that google doesn't have. it remembers your searches, and keeps them handy. it remembers your view, and returns you there when you next visit virtualearth. and it refreshes your search query as you pan the map -- something i found very useful that google doesn't do.
i found the ve "locate me" feature to be an interesting curiosity, but i'd focus first on improving the imagery and driving directions before investing in toys like this.
finally, i'm using google maps more and more for local search like finding restaurants and reviews. google's appears to have built a local-search database by mining the open web, which i usually find more insightful and relevant to the questions i'm asking -- especially when i don't know exactly what i'm looking for.
4. i compared the max zoom and found (at least for my house) msn is definitely better. see my blog for screen shot.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Seth Russell
6. i tried this on the u.k and it was horrible. not only was the zoom quite bad but also the naming of places was badly done so it was confusing to find places even from a distant view and knowing where you are looking. google maps and google earth has set up their display of the u.k in a very easy way.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Damian
8. i've heard that the photos from msn virtual earth are from 1994, would anyone be able to confirm that?
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Damian
9. this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050726/ap_on_hi_te/disappearing_apple) indicates that the msn data is from late 1991 for at least some of their images but that they're updating.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Patrick Wynne
10. msn virtual earth is far from being at the level of google maps. have a look at this nyc photo from msn:
http://doiop.com/msn/nyc
1. the photo is from before september 11th.
2. there is one big seam on the bottom right side, as there are so many on msn all over the place.
3. can't zoom closer.
one would expect that downtown manhattan would at least be flawless. and everywhere else i searched on msn maps, i found the same type of "errors".
by the way, don't hold your breath: msn's 45 degrees view will never happen... :)
11. To zoom closer in MSN VE, do a screen capture, save as image file, open with Windows Picture and Fax Viewer and zoom. It works very well on many images, not so good on others.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by DJ Bonebreak
12. To zoom closer in MSN VE, do a screen capture, save as image file, open with Windows Picture and Fax Viewer and zoom. It works very well on many images, not so good on others.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by DJ Bonebreak
13. Google Earth is the shit. I was blown away when I first saw it a couple weeks ago. It literally consumed me for the first few days as I spent hour after hour doing fly overs of every place i've ever been and many that I haven't...open Google Earth and try the fly over of Greenland, or some of the heartier deserts around the globe, remote islands, and mountain peaks.
I can't imagine any MSFT product improving on Google Earth unless they basically copy what has already been done by GOOG first. By the way, I'm sure that they will.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by San Diego Shawn
1. The zoom on this is impressive. I can get much closer to buildings, and with great detail than Google Earth. Some locations I tried were better than others.
Posted at 4:42AM on Dec 19th 2005 by Todd Henley