Talk:Comparison of geographic information systems software

Mapserver

Mapserver is available on all the platforms shown - it's shown as available on none of them.

Yes/No/Java

WTF does that mean? Is Java closer to Yes, or closer to No?

Java is platform independent so this makes sense thought there might be a better way to make this distinction. 198.190.230.61 21:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

ESRI and GNU/Linux?

It should be stated that most ESRI software does NOT run on GNU/Linux (to my knowledge only the JAVA based viewer ArcExplorer) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumbulski (talk • contribs) 07:06, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Actually their server products run on Linux. http://www.esri.com/software/standards/linux-support.html --72.208.195.253 17:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Global Mapper?

Global Mapper should be added to this list

Removed "Working Comparison of GIS Software" section

I've removed the Working Comparison of GIS Software section, which rated the features of several packages on a scale of 1-5 (poor to excellent). This isn't appropriate for Wikipedia since these ratings are purely subjective (see Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). --Watom (talk) 02:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Misleading "Free" column

You are using "Free" as "gratis" indication here, but you reference to the article [Free software] which speaks about freedom to redistribute the source code. Better call that column "gratis" and don't link to the article [Free software] or add a separate column. ACCUGLOBE, CARIS, Leica ERDAS IMAGINE, Leica viewers etc are definitely NOT [Free software]! OSGeo.org 13:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

As it was obviously wrong, and no one has paid any attention since the last comment, I have modified it and it now links to "Freeware". I have also modified the column title to "Free (Gratis)" to be less confusing. 85.185.20.2 (talk) 11:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Needs a comparison of features section

This article needs some description of the different capabilities of the various software. There should also be a distinction between desktop GIS and the internet GIS tools. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.11.170 (talk) 02:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

So, now we have this page, but it really really needs to be expanded. Valerie (talk) 15:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

comparison of "notable" GIS software

Please define the word "notable"? I see applications not included and I would like to know why. 174.51.157.220 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Non Notable entries

Entries in the list need to be Notable to be included. They need to either have an existing Wikipedia article or have proof (reliable, third-party, published sources) that they are Notable. There are quite a few entries here that do not have Wikipedia articles and just use a link to their own website as proof of notability. That proves the software or company exists, not that the list entry meets Wikipedia's standards for Notable. Those entries should be removed or reliable, third-party, published sources showing notability should be added to them. Stesmo (talk) 22:14, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Simple and free GIS for the critical analyses

OK... I am a geographer and several of my geographer friends are asking about alternatives for ArcGIS or other commercial solutions.

What this groups is looking for is the latest trends in the open GIS world and what application are good for there considerations.

What comparison would this group need?

I think I would like to see how spread the use of a application is, f.x. like the number of users.

	Popularity	Developer	Latest stable release	Stable release date	Open source	License	Programming language
QGIS	no data	QGIS Development Team	2.6 (Brighton)	November 1, 2014	Yes	GNU GPL	C++, Python, Qt
gvSIG	no data	gvSIG Association	2.0	April 15, 2013	Yes	GNU GPL	Java
GRASS GIS	no data	GRASS Development Team	6.4.4	May 25, 2014	Yes	GNU GPL	C, C++, Python, Tcl
Opticks, the remote sensing application	no data	Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp	4.10.0	October 15, 2012	Yes	LGPL 2.1	C++, Python

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.182.184.2 (talk • contribs)

The problem with the popularity-column is that nobody knows how many people use those programs. In any case I have never seen any numbers published by these projects. Number of downloads and number of licences sold, are also bad measures for how many people use a program. I think it would be better to compare different features between the different programs. I think ArcGIS didn't have Python support for a long time. And I don't think it can access a PostGIS database. But I'm not up do date, because I haven't used ArcGIS in years. --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Split out Software and Company into separate columns

It can be very confusing what the name of the product is in the "License, source, & operating system support" table. Would it maybe be helpful to have a separate "Company" column to the right of the "GIS Software" column, where then both would be sortable, and it would be much easier to see who created what product(s)? For instance, ArcGIS does not list that it is made by ESRI, but Caliper is listed on all of its products. Wouldn't think it would take more than a short bit to fix this up. Actorma (talk) 21:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

GMT

How come GMT is not listed here? Kileytoo (talk) 15:27, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of geographic information systems software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080605120434/http://www.foss4g2007.org/presentations/view.php?abstract_id=136 to http://www.foss4g2007.org/presentations/view.php?abstract_id=136

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of geographic information systems software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121112163555/http://sourceforge.net/userapps/mediawiki/mentaer/index.php?title=Open_Source_GIS_Software to http://sourceforge.net/userapps/mediawiki/mentaer/index.php?title=Open_Source_GIS_Software

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:19, 25 January 2018 (UTC)