Mapbox is more similar to Fusion Tables in terms of workflow. While each company essentially sells the same end result – map hosting services that can serve large data sets as tiled maps – each delivers their products very differently. In the end I concluded two companies offered products that matched my needs: Mapbox and Maptiler. I spent a lot of time researching and testing available services and technologies. The goal here is to visualize large datasets on interactive maps with the lowest possible cost and difficulty.
#Maptiler custom professional
It is my goal to evaluate map technology providers from the perspective of a webmaster, not a GIS professional or programmer. Technologies outside of the Google ecosystem are largely geared towards GIS professionals, with little documentation or tools that help non-GIS people get started quickly and easily. Mapping a lot of data was easy with Fusion Tables, so I was shocked to find just how difficult competing products would be. Fusion Tables is being discontinued so I needed to find an alternative for mapping large datasets.
More importantly, Fusion Tables rendered the data layer on the map on the server side, eliminating the inevitable performance issues on client machines that made mapping large datasets difficult or impossible This is what 2,715 data points looked like mapped with Google Fusion Tables. For those unfamiliar with Fusion Tables, it was a product that allowed for fast and easy rendering of large datasets on Google Maps.įusion Tables was easy to use, and allowed website owners to display many thousands of placemarks quickly and easily. The impetus for the comparisons made in this article was Google’s announcement that they were discontinuing their Fusion Tables product.
0 kommentar(er)
