Mapping and GIS
we support both, but what are they?

GIS since 2006 and before

Since 2006 we have had mapping & GIS with ESRI ArcGIS. ESRI ArcGIS licensing only lets their data be offlined when using ESRI's products, when using 3rd party products, their licensing requires that you only connect live, so a CMMS cannot legally offline their data.

But your data can be offlined legally ... unless you decide otherwise. Fortunately most of our customers with ArcGIS have their own data/base maps that can legally be oflinned.

Mapping with OpenStreetMaps, Google and your own sources

We also have mapping with OpenStreetMaps (fully offlineable in applications like ours) and Google maps (Google maps licensing only lets data be offlined with using Google's products).

You can, with our system, also add your own layers, even to the point of being a mini-GIS system.

So what's the difference?

We have a discussion of this from another perspective: Mapping vs GIS a different perspective

Cost

The big one many people see first (or eventually) is cost. ESRI very quickly becomes an extremely expensive product.

Where vrs detailed what

If you care about getting from A to B and where things like your buildings, you care about mapping.

If you care about the things on the map such as the asphalt the road is made out of, the type of paint the lines are, whether the speed limit sign is plastic or metal or wood and the type of paint used on the speed limit sign, then you care about GIS.

Downtime cost

For a city, where a severe water main break costs hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour, spending several million dollars a year on ArcGIS plus several hundred thousand dollars a year on ours is a worthwhile expenditure. But for someone who just needs to know were something is or how to get there, the cost of GIS does not match value of the info. You can get into GIS relatively cheaply, but it seldom stays that way.

Labor

Expect to spend a lot of time and effort building and maintaining GIS. Expect to spend as little time as possible building and maintaining Mapping.

If you are already vested in ESRI ArcGIS you will obviously be keeping that. But don’t dismiss Mapping because you have a GIS you should still consider adding our mapping solutions for cases where you don’t need the more expensive product as well as bringing a significant portion of the GIS into an offline (legally) position! There is no point paying for GIS for users who only need mapping – especially since you are severely restricted in taking GIS base maps and more into an offline status.

Misc

Some people, not completely unfairly, describe mapping as ‘greatly simplified GIS’, and GIS as ‘mapping on steroids’

Mapping is about the user's typical interaction with the environment, while GIS is about the environment itself and its various attributes and data.

Summary

Beyond cost, looking at features, Mapping and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and look similar on the surface (pun intended) and in many ways are closely related but serve often vastly different purposes.

Mapping (Computer, paper maps are obviously far less sophisticated)

  • Mapping involves creating visual representations of geographic areas. This can be done on paper or digitally.
  • The primary goal is to display and search spatial information, such as roads, rivers, boundaries, assets (stationary and mobile), in in a way that is easy to understand.
  • Like GIS, you can query, do searches in areas and visualize the results in real time.

@@ GIS (Geographic Information Systems)

  • GIS is a system that captures, stores, analyzes, and presents spatial or geographic data.
  • Beyond just displaying and searching for information, GIS allows for complex storage, analysis and manipulation of data. It can integrate various data layers to provide deeper insights.
  • Like mapping, GIS is dynamic and interactive, but more sophisticated compared to mapping. Users can query the data, perform spatial analysis, and visualize results in real-time.

@@ Key Differences

  • While mapping focuses on the visual representation of data 'from the air', GIS provides tools to go much deeper, both figuratively and literally.
  • Both have large amounts of interactive capability allowing you to explore and search, but GIS will have a lot more types of data and useful layers allowing more sophisticated analysis and searches.
  • GIS can integrate multiple data sources, such as demographic information, environmental data, and infrastructure details, to provide a comprehensive view. Mapping is much more limited in this regard.
  • A road 'segment' on GIS will typically be much smaller (often meters in length) than a mapping read segment (often kilometers in length)
  • Mapping is usually the view on TOP of the built world. GIS is usually THE built world itself. Mapping is typically about how we interact with the built environment. It involves creating visual representations (maps) that help us understand and navigate our surroundings. For example, a map showing the locations of restaurants in a city helps you decide where to eat. GIS goes to the next level by not just focusing on interactions but on the built environment itself. GIS involves collecting, analyzing, and managing spatial data about the physical world. It can be used for urban planning, environmental monitoring, and resource management, providing a deeper understanding of the spatial relationships and patterns.

Example

Mapping would look at a road segment as being

  • a line from one place to another
  • direction (one way - which way, two way road)
  • road closures
  • addresses attached to it
  • Maybe current potholes
  • proximity to other features such as schools, buildings, parks
  • combined with EAM/CMMS it would know things such as maintenance, inspections, costs and so on, and allow for searching/selecting and routing, analyzing some environmental impacts of planned, proposed or considered work.

GIS is all of the above, but it would look at the same road segment deeper, some examples could include:

  • Width of the road
  • Number of lanes in each directions
  • Width of each lane, each shoulder
  • Details about the median, if any
  • Markings (passing in the middle? Double solid? Similar for between lanes and between outer lanes and shoulder if any)
  • Any lanes special? (Bike, Bus, carpool)
  • Z values: Absolute height. is the road level? Sloped in one direction from end to end of the segment? Sloped to the side, perhaps on curved sections or because of normal drainage issues, crested in middle? How much?
  • Entities such as signage
  • Surface level, How thick, what type (asphalt, concrete), compressive strength, the top layer is
  • Binder Level, type, e.g. asphalt
  • Base Course, type of aggregate, how high a traffic load seasonally (often less in the spring for example)
  • Subbase. Type of stone or gravel
  • Subgrade, type, stabilization methods chosen (lime, concrete)
  • Drainage layer, culverts, ditches
  • Geotextile Fabrics, type, which layers they are between
  • Closed when wet? (think dirt roads)
  • Current traffic, rush hour traffic, night time
  • Designed traffic load
  • Traffic history
  • Environmental impact
  • Demographics
  • Accident history
  • Current condition
  • And potentially so many other points of data. We have customers who have over 500 points of data on an entity like a road segment.

All that just for each segment of a road that is perhaps 10-100 meters long. Far more than mapping would ever care about. And can be used to analyze patterns of use if a new road is built, weather impacts, how traffic affects nearby features such as the aforementioned schools, buildings and parks.

At the extremes, the differences between mapping and GIS are clear, but some companies use products like ESRI ArcGIS as a glorified (and very expensive) map, and some companies use mapping software as a low end - but very useful - GIS system. Products like ours admittedly help to 'blur' the lines. So in the middle, the differences are blurry and it depends on how valuable certain features are whether you should go to GIS or Mapping. We are agnostic, we work with both and provide EAM/CMMS value regardless of whether you go GIS, Mapping, both or neither.

Who is a candidate for:

GIS only:

  • Really, no one. GIS only is more limiting (legally offlining is heavily restricted) and more expensive for those that just need mapping that works in concert with their GIS. Not everyone in an organization with mapping is likely to need GIS. Note that GIS can produce maps, so this doesn't immediately mean you need a second product - though you may find it best to.

GIS and mapping: (noting this is a lower cost option than GIS only)

  • Municipalities
  • Utility companies
  • Anyone above who does not have perfect internet everywhere they go
  • Anyone above who maintains their assets (everyone)

Essentially, if you are someone who, when you look at the map start thinking "How am I going to maintain that road when …" or "How many inches of 3/4" road crush does that road" or "Is the sewer line above, below or beside the gas line" - then you are likely an excellent candidate for GIS + Mapping, and using our EAM/CMMS for the teams managing and maintaining everything that is in the GIS.

Mapping only:

  • Most corporations
  • Basically everyone that does not need the GIS features
  • Noting that if you only need 'light' GIS, Mapping with MCe gives you that ability.

Essentially, if you are someone who, when you look at a map don't think about the type or maintenance of the roads and related, but rather only think "Ah, that's where/that's how I can get to what's important", then you are an excellent candidate for Mapping.

If you are unsure, talk to us about your use case. While we are certified ArcGIS developers, we are not resellers, so we have no vested interest in whether you buy ArcGIS or not. So, among knowledgeable sources, we are among the least biased, we can discuss your needs and explain why we recommend the direction we do for you. But we'll be happy to work with you whether you choose GIS, GIS & Mapping or just Mapping.