Neo, Geo, GIS and Innovation
July 28, 2009 32 Comments
So every couple weeks, we get the neo is moving on up post. My good friend Peter Batty wrote one titled, “How “neogeography” is rapidly moving into the “GIS” space“.
At several conferences I have attended recently – Where 2.0, WhereCamp and State of the Map (SOTM) – I have been struck by the amount of activity and innovation in areas that would have previously been regarded as firmly in the domain of “traditional GIS”. I’ll mention three: cartography, data creation and analysis.
So after reading his post, Peter and I shared some tweets back and forth and it became clear 140 characters is not enough. Good thing I still blog.
So lets look at the basis of what Peter and many others are saying about “Neo”. Peter is right in calling out Stamen Design as an innovator in our space (and many others). But I disagree with his assessment that they are doing anything that is particularly neo. What Stamen does is just incredible and really changes how web graphics are presented. But I don’t think it really matters if they are Neo or not. Their work stands on its own without having to put labels on it. Oh sure they use OSM, Mapnik and many other Web 2.0 technologies, but that doesn’t make them Neo. I also don’t buy the argument some make that if you are innovative, you must be neo. Innovation is something that transcends a label.
Am I neo because I run Mapnik at the same time I’m paleo because I run ArcGIS Desktop? Stamen, OSM and GeoCommons are all important because they innovate, not because they put a label on their shirts. In the end what is important is companies that innovate should be rewarded. But I don’t think just because you use one piece of software or another should you be limited in your ability to take part in the revolution.
Peter’s underlying message is that you can be innovative without spending money tens of thousands of dollars. That is a huge point to make about this “revolution”. Being able to pick and choose platforms to develop on is a huge departure from the silos and stacks that we’ve been dealing with for years. Heck, I wouldn’t have joined WeoGeo unless I didn’t believe things were changing for the better.
Viva La Revolución
About James Fee
Totally agree. I’m as neo as the next guy, but most of this stuff is just marketing. Peter seems to be really getting into the neo crowd. Is Andrew buying him drinks again?
The three terms I’m really starting to get tired of are neogeography, geoweb and “the cloud”. I think they are just a crutch to help people talk about things they themselves don’t understand.
Good post though James as usual. Guess that is why you are influential, despite what Peter might say about the poll.
I agree that James is influential, you haven’t seen my list yet
!
Looking at the poll, I see you’re already more influential than your new boss at WeoGeo, James. Surely that deserves a pay rise?
As for the neo/paleo thing, why does anybody need the distinction at all? It’s the tools that count, and how you apply them to the job at hand. Drop the neo/paleo labels and the argument goes away, surely?
This has got to be the lamest poll ever! It’s very hard for me to believe that Dimitri didn’t even make the list.
@Shrek
The above comment by was made by an imposter.
For me the confusion always came from these terms: geo-web, web mapping and web GIS. The confusion unfortunately doesn’t come from the words these terms use, but rather the way people interpret them.
For me, the geo-web is far too encompassing. It is all the spatially enabled web applications out there. In that regard, Akamai is probably one of the leaders, as is Google, in the sense that they discover the geography of the network and find shortest routes from your computer to their server, without you even realizing that is a geographic problem solved real-time. Isn’t that geo-web, or as an amazing accomplishment as me being able to find a service that allows me to upload shapefiles and get KML files back?
And then come the arguments about web mapping killing desktop GIS and that web mapping is the future of GIS. Yet mapping is exactly that, creating maps. It is not the complete toolbox of spatial analysis that GIS allows. Yes, I can find a route on web mapping tools, but that’s about it. Where is my viewshed analysis? Flow traces? All the other cool stuff GIS can do?
Even more confusing for me is when people use web GIS as a descriptive term for something like Google Maps. Why, from all the definitions of GIS, would anyone think that web GIS is anything other than the medium connecting the many components of GIS? If the internet and the web are an information highway, why would GIS use it differently? Web GIS for me is GIS implemented to use the web as a communications mechanism between components. If we ever manage to get interoperability between the components from different vendors we can perhaps have a mashable GIS, but lacking components and using one component over the web a GIS does not make in my book.
Now if you bring neo-geography into the mix, then I am lost. Is neo-geography new because tools are available? GRASS has been GPL’ed since 1999. And don’t forget, Google Maps was bought out in 2004. It was already around before that. What is neo- then about neo-geography? Is the user-provided data new? But even OSM is 2004. Wikimapia is 2006 if I am not mistaken. And even if it is the user-generated data, how does it differ from what Goodchild framed as VGI (Volunteered Geographic Information), a term focusing on the data rather than geography as a whole?
What I am trying to say is that there is a lot of naming going around lately, and to me it seems like an attempt for ownership. Remember, if you get to name something, you own it. This seems like a classic example of this, valuable as it may be.
As a cartographer I’m not sure how to take this discussion. Peter seems to be giving me the finger because I choose to use MapInfo and Adobe Illustrator with NAVTEQ roads.
If I put out a quality product for my clients and they feel they are getting value out of it, why does that make me not innovative. I work very hard on my cartography and while I have played with OSM and Mapnik, my clients require the quality of NAVTEQ. OSM is fine a a national level or even state level, but at the neighborhood level it just isn’t consistent enough to use.
I’m not sure so much that Peter was being critical of your workflows than he was highlighting that you could make beautiful maps without paying anyone anything.
Of course we get into the theory that someone has to pay the costs to improve the tools. You can’t take, take, take from these projects without giving back.
Alex, I am not trying to put you down and am sorry if you took it that way. I am more trying to make the point that a lot of people in the “traditional GIS” world say that this “neogeography” stuff (whatever that means) is nothing to do with the “serious” stuff that we do. My point is that increasingly people are using these new tools in areas that have been the exclusive domain of the traditional vendors, and I’m encouraging people to look at the emerging set of tools that they have at their disposal. I am not a fan of making any real distinction between traditional GIS and neogeography (I will post more on that shortly) and I think that traditional GIS is the right tool for many things still. But my main point is that things are changing rapidly, and those who think that the newer generation of neogeo/web mapping systems are not relevant to “serious GIS” are misguided (IMHO!) – they will be an increasingly larger piece of the puzzle over the next few years.
Again I just have to say I love your blog graphics.
After being sent here because of the graphic, I decided to read the post. And I must say, I think I’m confused.
I update OSM on a regular basis.
I work with NAVTEQ data at work.
I use ArcGIS at school.
I use QGIS at home.
I have studied Cartography from two different instructors, one a full fledged Cartographer.
Where the heck am I? Am I paleo, neo, or both? And to be honest, why not be both? Why not be able to understand the basics of map design while working with OSM data?
Sorry for this. I just hate being labelled and this is why. I don’t tend to fit them very well.
Good post though
Teresa, the best descriptions of the Neo v. Paleo I have heard came during the NEMA Conf last year in Portland.
You are more Paleo if you spend more time working on traditional mapping functions. So if you spend most of your time working in a world where your target is analysis that is printed in the dead-tree edition.
You are more Neo if you spend most of your time working in the live/web arena where you are providing sources of data to be consumed and extended by others. So tools like OSM and mashups make you more of Neo.
Now you are in the same boat as me, we are Neo-Paleo-Cartographers we have to meet the needs of the real-world while still pushing for the more bleeding edge. You probably enjoy playing with the newer technologies and trying to find ways to get them in place at work!
So that makes you part cartographer, part developer and also part evengelist because you probably are always looking for the best tool or best way to get the job done!
Did that confuse you more?
Teresa,
You sound a lot like a Geographer to me than anything. I feel that the neo- paleo- labels are just means for people to sell their product. And interestingly enough, these polemics are always binary and never allow for the fuzzy boundaries we so much discuss in Geography in general.
For me, a person that does what you do, is simply an applied geographer. Using the right tools and data for the right job and avoiding the blind-faith some exhibit in their work. Some things are better suited for ArcGIS, some need SmallWorld, GRASS can do wonders, and so can QGIS, always depending on what you need. Similarly, TeleAtlas data are perfect in some situations, in others OSM may be better. Why choose a camp?
Maybe someone should create a market segmentation on geospatial user communities, similar to what ESRI has done for the meatspace with their “tapestry”.
Paleo and Neo would be just one of many categories in the segmentation scheme.
The Mainstream IT Department would need to be a segment. Remember them? – they’re the ones with the money. Unlike the tapestry though, the important thing is how the segments relate to each other:
A Neo publishes something cool on the web. A CEO sees it, gets annoyed, and asks his Mainstream IT Department “how can some kid create these maps with minimal resources when we can’t even do this with our __ million $ budget?” The IT Department rattles the cage (silo) of the Paleo Geographer asking why he can’t open up his data to the rest of the enterprise. The Paleo Geographer scratches his (rather gray) beard and responds, mumbling something about datums and projections. Frustrated, the IT Department requests MapIT. The CEO looks over the IT Department’s purchase request, who have pointed out that ESRI’s MapIT brochure never says MapIT is GIS. PO gets approved, Restful web services get published and the Neo gets an (air conditioned!) summer internship writing useful corporate apps.
Reminds me of an interesting issue we had here. Several local cities are pushing out their crime data in online mapping. The maps neatly show, through pushpin locations, all the areas where crime was declining. They did it spending a small amount of money with “neo” vendors using mashup methods.
We started working on a similar map. We went “paleo” in our backend with some pretty extensive work on time of day, geocoding, geomasking, etc.
Making the initial application took hardly any time, less if we had used a mashup. Performance was abysmal though. We kept tweaking performance. But then data was the real problem, especially deciding how to classify and how to geocode.
That’s when we saw it… data holes in the other cities’ data, data quality problems, projection issues, heavy rounding in time of day, a problematic geomasking “algorithm”, and most importantly, the web services were cutting off the number of reports to get performance (rarely returning 100% and often returning less than 10%).
Those crime declines? They weren’t declines, they were missing data. A fast and nifty “neo” mashup for cheap was failing for lack of effort on the expensive “paleo” side. Worse part? The public still hasn’t noticed, and we already know that the vendors will take the blame when they do.
I do believe there are segments of the geospatial profession that might not be aware whatsoever that something like neogeography, cloud-computing,or other geospatial neologisms exist at all. There are plenty of people floating around Portland that, until I adopted social media tools, I would have never met.
At first I thought, “web professionals have discovered how to geocode and use points on a map.” Now, as the landscape resolves itself a bit more, I understand it to be bigger than that.
Reaching out to some of these people has proven to be very rewarding for both parties. There are many things we can learn from each other. People are always better to meet than neologisms.
Honest Stream of consciousness complete – JH
Think back to where the geo-universe was in October 2004.
Back when Keyhole was a one-trick-pony building globes inside the Intelligence Community, and Google was a search engine. And the idea of GPS everywhere was still some Banana Republican’s idea of location-based salvation.
Fast forward to today. Google has thrown *B*illions in direct and indirect money after the world’s largest geospatial demo. Their investment has shown the world how cool maps and imagery really are. It’s kewl they even let some of us geo-wankers play our games and build toys that run off the site.
Now, there’s plenny of kewl tools that have evolved alongside the Mother Earth, and the whole internets thing is really settling in for the long haul – we can thank Al for that, of course – but I’d say none of the geo-whatever or location-based-confabulated-monetizers would have had a snowballs chance without the general public’s understanding of WHY geography matters.
NEO-schmeo. If you’re doing the work, it’s your job to get it done right the first time, on time and under budget. If you’re not following those guidelines, you’re either in the services business (certainly that wouldn’t be ESRI, would it?) and want to run up the engagement time, or you’re wedded to an old approach.
Going to be interesting to see how ESRI adjusts in the next year or so to the sparkling proliferation of easy-to-integrate, simple-to-use, and low-cost tools that run on [gasp] something other than SDE.
I have been doing the ‘neo-geo’ conference circuit for the last 3 years and to be honest with you…its largely made up of transients who have a dabble and go at adding location to this or that or making a map look nicer, but how much innovation has really occurred.
Instead of innovation i would call it ‘synthesis’. Basically taking multiple ideas that others before you have documented, developed and established and adding 1…n additional variables and then you get something new. For those of you that like TLC…they had (not sure of they still run this show) a great series called Connections with James Burke. If James were to do a Connections type program on Geospatial i would like to see where he would start and who really were the ‘synthesizers’ and the ‘innovators’ over the last 30 years.
Some of the names on the ‘Top Influential’ list are a joke (Paul B, Ed P) and it looks like they were self-promoted (sorry but i’ve listened to you both speak and you were not that impressive or influential…just being honest guys)…whereas some of the others that have been in the geo-space and actually made decisions and molded and created something (Frank W, Jack D, Carl R) are the real influencer’s. Just my 2 cents. Keep it real.
If I’m a geo-anything, I’d have to say I’m a geo-pragmatist. What I do entails maps, computers, surveys, research, web-apps, compasses, poison ivy and being up to my ass in swamp water (in the summer) or snow (in the winter). So you’ll have to forgive me if I just grab the closest tool at hand that will get the job done.
Does this make me Neo? Paleo? How about Meso? Truth be told, I don’t give much of a crap. This discussion has gotten a little tiresome. You’re a Neo-geographer? Good for you! I’m sure that’s MUCH better than just a plain, old ‘geographer’. I mean – it’s got a ‘neo’ attached to it and everything. Or maybe you’re ‘paleo’, which was a good joke at first but has since become equally meaningless (and I really am surprised that I haven’t yet heard of ‘meso-geographers’, but maybe I just haven’t been paying close enough attention).
My point is that I think we’re all wasting our time having these discussions about semantics. Does it really matter what we call ourselves? Especially – does it matter to anyone outside our profession? I doubt it. I got hired to be ‘The Map Guy’, and I’m willing to bet that many of you have been, too. And I can’t tell you all how many times I’ve been asked to ‘Do the GIS’ (come on – I KNOW you can all sympathize with this one). Our field(s) is(are) broad, and currently defies definition and/or pigeon-holing. If we must separate it into component parts (which I don’t believe we DO have to do – yet), I don’t think throwing neologisms around would be a particularly effective approach.
But if we must, I hereby officially lay claim (again) to “Double-Secret NeoGISrapher”. I’d explain it to you, but it’s kind of complicated.
Pingback: GIS in XML » Blog Archive » Neo vs Paleo Geography
3 things:
1. I am convinced there IS a kind of revolution in progress with innovations like mashup, data ubiquity, real-time, read-write web, crowdsourcing and all those features of the web 2.0 hype. And it is not restricted to our small Geo world. As Joshua-Michele Ross says in his inspiring article The Rise Of The Social Nervous System :
“[...] Internet is a communications network, and communication is the foundation of society, business and government. When you scale up communications, you change the world.”
2. In the other hand, there is still a place (and I would say more than ever!) for ‘traditional’ GIS expertise to produce good quality reference data, to validate and integrate data from various sources and data models, to render it properly in a readable map, and to give it added value trough spatial analysis (I would like to see more ‘old fashioned’ – but so great – spatial analysis out there!).
3. So, I don’t think it is a matter of neo vs paleo. Like in any healthy ecosystem, the Geo world has numerous niches. It is clear for example that big organisations that deals with sensitive data (e.g. banks) or are responsible of other people’s life (e.g. emergency services) have to think about it more than twice before replacing existing systems with the last trendy technology! Oppositely, a young guy (or girl!) with good ideas and a computer can really move the things forward. There is no need to have a cyclotron, a radiotelescope or to be the boss of a well funded medical service to innovate in the Geo field these days. How lucky we are!
So, everybody sings with me:
“You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world”
Very well said! This blog post and all of the comments are excellent.
GIS describes the skills.
Neo/paleo describes the tools.
I krige.
Because I know, I’m paleo; because I can, I could be anyone today.
Paleo = us (since only ‘us’ reads this drivel)
Neo = everyone (since anyone who’s used the internets has kriged, either on a map, or by extension since it’s all inside Google)
With apologies to the Possum – We have met the public, and we are it.
krigo, ergo sum?
This horse dead yet??!!
Nah. Git y’all a stick an’ whup on it.
Your usually good for a pithy trope or two, KoS – how ’bout it?
Sorry to disappoint…don’t have the energy. The subject matter isn’t that interesting. Who or what is called x or y. *shrugs*
Here’s something interesting I’d like to point out…
I don’t know how many of you attended the advances in GIScience sessions at the ESRI UC, but there were two things largely lacking from the sessions.
GIS Software and Maps.
Sure, both were there in most presentations, but both were rarely a focus of those presentations.
Big emphasis? Building spatial data from other data types, especially from temporal data (both explicit and implicit spatial temporal data).
You really want to see the next thing? Check out what Texas State put up. Or look at Hornsby’s and Li’s dynamic path modeling from natural language expressions.
Next realm for mashups? Check out VDCmp’s three dimensional social exchange model, and try to classify that work as neo or paleo.
Pingback: My latest lesson in GIS — Don Meltz’s Blog
Great post, retwitted it in fact, but who’s the dude in the pic?