no where as good as google earth

Tried it and it's not nearly as good as google free earth. In fact it's pretty cheesy.

I just noticed something on VirtualEarth! There are in fact many recent, color plates on the map. LA, Seattle, San Francisco, Tampa, Orlando, among I'm sure other cities are all in color. Interestingly, other big cities such as New York, Miami, and Dallas were not color. But obviously this is a sign of what's truly to come.

Edit:
In fact, it seems that the color plates in those cities are the same plates that are on Google Maps. The only one I checked was downtown St. Louis, but it makes sense that the rest would be the same. The nice thing is that you can zoom in MUCH closer on MSN, although it doesn't seem to be any better resolution at the closest zoom.

Those are USGS urban ortho, they aren't available in many areas yet. They are high resolution color photos taken from an airplane.

Can you say copy cat? Come up with your own ideas... and stop coping everything Google does how childish is that? I got an ice cream, I got an ice cream..... kids stuff.

Stop duplicating everyone else and come up with something that you as a company came up with, everything they do is a copy of someone elses work... not one idea of their own????

Where do you think google is born from? Copied from yahoo or msn search. And till this date msn provides is more accurate search result then google, the survey conducted by Princton Univ.
So stop crying like a kid. It's better for us as customers. And stop give your opinion on beta versions. You probably hate microsoft just because others are writing it, YOU SHOULD HAVE YOUR OWN OPINION, stop copying others' view.

Hey buddy you get your Own OPINION doink. I believe I am certainly allowed mine. Boyz I was almost ready to type something rude... but my fingers said no, you are one lucky dog! :o)

Oh and by the way... I am a Microsoft Certified Professional... so how about you just keep you foolish ideas to your own self, I am most certainly allowed to make my own point of view known... just like you are, only I tend to make my opinions about the software and not the people who are making the posts... so perhaps you should rethink how you post? 10 year olds shouldn't be allowed to use the Beta News site.

*cough*

Useless post.

Edit: This one, I mean.

Google's Beta will be better than Microsoft's finished product.

Suckers

The photo of my house from MSN Virtual Earth was taken in 1994. The photos from Google are from 2005. Beta or not, I have my doubts.

I checked three areas where I go, LI, Upstate NY, Florida, All pictures show fine maybe 1.5-2 years old. All work both are. and sat.

Okay people...

Read the article.. Please. Quit whining about how crappy it looks, or how the images are out of date, or that it's slow...Christ people, it's a beta.

It's okay if you post your opinion mind you, just don't act like this is the finished product and as good as it's going to get. You sound like you're under the impression this is it. It ain't.

> "In an interview with BetaNews in May, Microsoft revealed that this is just the beginning of what MSN plans to do with Virtual Earth."

Announced today...

Google was out of date when they first released Google Earth as a beta. Then they updated. Many areas were unaccessible. then they updated.

I am by no meanas a huge supporter of MS, but I'm getting tired of folks getting all nit-picky about unfinished products.

You don't want to see images that are out of date, or that have low res, or that reside on slow servers? Then what the hell are you doing looking at a BETA, you ****tard?!?!?

Blah Blah Blah Blah ......

Blah Blah ....

Words......words......words....

Junk........Junk.....

That's about how much sense you make you trashbag.

tosh9i - TerraServer's maps are a lot older than Googles. Check Simi Valley, CA on both.

Microsoft, Are these images from the 90's?

I'm looking at costco right by my house and its nothing but a field on microsoft Virtual Earth, However google maps shows the development. Also once you zoom in MS shows black and white, google is colored!

Overall, Google Maps is better; it seems to be more current images and in color. However, for Microsoft Virtual Earth just starting, it's not that bad.

My problem is the images seem 5+ years old on Virtual Earth. I hope our government doesn't experience the same delay in satilite images, however this would explain why Bush insisted Iraq has weapons of mass destruction!

I believe that the images that Google and MSN use are from June 2002. If you go to this webpage:

http://terraserver.homea...or.msn.com/default.aspx

and type in your address, it should take you to a page where it says Urban Areas 06/13/2002.

Those images are identical to the ones on Google Earth.

I live in Auckland, New Zealand so M$ flavour of it's mapping software isn't as detail as Google's. Thou I am sure this will improve in the future, for now I'll stick with Google Earth.

Huge improvement over Google? Maybe if you only care to look up U.S. locales. For Canada and elsewhere Google is much better.

Google only had U.S. locales when it started. This is still in beta you know, the rest of the world will be added when it's finished. Sheesh...

People keep trying to compare this to Google Earth. Its not the same. Its more like maps.google.com which is not a download like Google Earth.
I found it worked pretty well. It also had far more detailed imagery than much of Google. Its still fairly early (BETA) but it is looking good.
I especially like how you can click the mouse to zoom in or out. Some of the roads didn't line up exactly with the satellite though I guess that is minor.

Several have mentioned how old the imagery is with Virtual Earth, but its equally old with Google Earth. I'm sure some is newer than others, but in both Earth's I found imagery from 2001 or so, which is about 4 years old then. So they need some updating. I can imagine that is quite an undertaking.
Right now Google Earth is better because it does the whole earth, but Virtual Earth is on the right track and is much clearer.

Well, the program in its current beta version is kind of in between Google Earth and Google Maps. The final version, however, will be like Google Earth.

As far as the images are concerned, they're different for all locations. Downtown Miami, for example, is current within at least January 2001 in Google, but before probably October 2000 in MSN.

It's still beta version. Just wait for regular version. You will get fairly latest pictures.

Oh great, no detail for the UK,,of course the world revolves around the USA

Google started out with US imagery only as well. These are American companies after all, how dare they have support for the US first in their programs! Go take a pill and relax, it's still in beta. UK imagery will be added later on.

Actually the world revolves around Redmond, WA USA. Would you expect the intitial beta to cover the entire globe immediately? I'm betting that when it's out of beta and actually released that the UK will more than likely be included. It kind of makes business sense to me to include the UK at some point even if it is a very small area on the globe.

Overall I like this better than Google Maps; much nicer looking too. It's not as up to date yet, but it's not finished either. I expect they will be updating things as it approaches final. This is still in beta so don't be too hard on any faults you may find at this time. Of course the Google fanboys are going to hate it; everything that Google touches is pure and wonderful to them. Anyway I believe this is the best choice for mapping, at least until NASA Worldwind gets a highway map extension and then it will own them all. :D

Whats wrong with this service in 2005?
Well, when I searched my home, it showed where my home was, but only the Aerial photo was of my locality 8 or 10 years ago, when there was no roads or construction where I live. All I got was a bunch of tree tops.

Google Earth is recent and much better.
Stick with google
-Warren.Z

It's like you think they aren't ever going to update the maps...

good thing they said this was a beta, I never would have guessed. ;-p I lost my satellite view after the first search and never got it back. :)

Wow...this really sucks.

Stick with Google Earth

Again....this seriously sucks bad.

Seriously.

It WILL be updated every 2 years. I'm sure these images are old and only being used for the beta. I'm sure (well, hopefully) the final version will have more recent photos.

Quote: Local landmarks are labeled and maps will be updated every two years on average.

When I go to Manhattan I still see the Twin-towers. So that map must be at least 3.5 years old.

Twin towers....nice.

And MS isn't behind at all? :P

You mean like an asses behind? Like ...you?

It's a beta moron. RTFA. They'll update the images (and probably many other things) well before it goes live.

I'd guess you went nuts over the Longhorn alpha screenshots as well, eh? Judging the OS by it's Alpha state. Absolutely brilliant.

Jeeze man, you don't know how to take a joke....not aimed at you....instead aimed at a big bad corporation....that leeches money out of millions....and owns the world.

That's insulting, btw, but I'm glad only people like you support Microsoft.

did someone mention Google Earth? It's like MSN Virtual Earth, but MUCH better...

MS really are behind the ball these days...

It sucks.

It's slow, and is nothing compared to Google Earth.

Why does Microsoft release junk like this and call it beta? They really need to clean it up and make it fast before they even make it available for testing.

**eyes rolling**

You have got to be kidding me right. Virtual Earth Blows Google right out of the water. It even blows them right off the earth.
Edit Comment.

It is better since you do not have to download a program. Note I just download the program. Even thought it eats alot of bandwidth. I have to say the the effects are features are very nice. There are some areas that VE have newer Sat. pics both google has some areas where they have new Sat. views.

This isn't supposed to be like Google Earth, more like Google Maps. Two different things; why don't you just compare it to WinAmp while you're at it?

***eyes rolling more***

They call it a beta becuase it isn't done, it isn't released, and it isn't for general use.

They will update the images.
They will update the servers.
They will add features.

Then they will remove the "beta" tag.

THEN your judgments of it might actually have some value other than proving your idiocy.

LOL.....

You are an idiot ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .....ha ha ha ha ha....

OK. Compare it to Google Maps then. It's still slower and looks worse.

And to the other tools....I know it's a beta. Google's Beta's are usually better than Microsoft's finished products :)

Suck on that for a while...

Funny, from the look of your post I'd say you were the only raving idiot on this board at the moment.

One thing I noticed over Google Earth, was it had higher-res images of my city which has a population of about 4,000. (black and white thought)

If you want high res imagery try Worldwind; they support just about every type available including USGS and USGS urban (which blows Google Earth's grainy images out of the water). You need a fast PC and a fast internet connection with Worldwind though, and it doesn't show road maps at this time.

Hey, this is pretty cool. One thing I definitely like over Google Earth is that it's web-based instead of a download. The images are low-resolution and dated (downtown Miami, for example, is at least before January 2001). It obviously doesn't have the capabilities of Google Earth yet, but it's a beta, so I'll let is slide.

The Locate Me function is kind of cool. Say you're at a coffee shop in an unknown area, click locate me to figure out where you are (and hope it gets you the right place), then you can find anything around you! Theoretically, at least.

I tried the “locate me” button and according to them I’m in L.A. even though I connect from a wireless hot spot in NYC.

It's not really comparable to Google Earth, more like maps.google.com

That's true, in its current state. In final version it'll be like Google Earth. Right now it actually seems to be somewhere in between Google Maps and Google Earth.

Ah Microsoft. Always copying and stealing ideas from the real innovators. I have tried their new mapping service and it just sucks. It has low resolution photos, black and white images, and some places you cannot even zoom in. It is just sad that with all their money they can come up with good ideas. What an embarrassment, and I know it just a beta, but common at least make it so it doesn’t resemble Google’s DUH!!!

When I used it I thought the photos were great (I don't mind the black and white) and actually had better images of my city. Overall I like it although I would probably still Google's just because I can access the API.

I know its keyhole's, but still they (MS) is always doing that. They see someone that has a good idea; they tweak it and use their money power to destroy the original creators. Fortunately, Google has good developers too. I just like to see what happens when MS tries to pick on someone their own size. :P

Sorry, I edited my comment above. But to your point, sure they see something and build their own. That's what everyone does. If you look at it that way then Google just copied Yahoo and in a couple of years you'll be able to say that Google used its power and money to strangle Yahoo.

and that is why Google is the next Microsoft. :P

I hate to tell you but this is not a new idea...the whole mapping thing.

"I have tried their new mapping service and it just sucks. It has low resolution photos, black and white images, and some places you cannot even zoom in."

It's still in beta genius.

> "Google used its power and money to strangle Yahoo."

Go Google!

Though I don't necessarily believe that Yahoo is their primary target. More of a roadside casualty.