Metropol

Hymagumba wrote:Plus my house and entire town is a brown blur

Same here.

Thing to remember is that the source came from outer space. So your house is, in a nutshell, too small and insignicifiant in the grand scale of things to turn up in any great detail compared to something bigger.

Just downloaded it then, even though it is recommended more for Broadband users, and me being a 56k user, I still think that is bloody brilliant, makes normal Google look crap, also good graphics too.

Had it for a few weeks now, bloody excellent. I love zooming in to the Dome and the London Eye. You can also see my house and school in Soham from the sky.

Poor you. Did you not use the bypass?

Nah, no pussy footing about. I went from Exmouth to Minehead via the sensible combination of M5 and A358, but decided to get a bit more adventurous for the return trek, taking the A39 with all it's trecherous obstacles like Porlock Hill et al.

Thing to remember is that the source came from outer space. So your house is, in a nutshell, too small and insignicifiant in the grand scale of things to turn up in any great detail compared to something bigger.

I'm sure some of the photography has got to be aerial photos as opposed to taken from space, there is a great deal of variation in the quality and style of some of the photography, and major cities are noticeably more detailed.

nwtv2003 wrote:Just downloaded it then, even though it is recommended more for Broadband users, and me being a 56k user, I still think that is bloody brilliant, makes normal Google look crap, also good graphics too.

yes, generally a 3D mapping system will make a static serach engine look crap

Hymagumba wrote:

nwtv2003 wrote:Just downloaded it then, even though it is recommended more for Broadband users, and me being a 56k user, I still think that is bloody brilliant, makes normal Google look crap, also good graphics too.

yes, generally a 3D mapping system will make a static serach engine look crap

I believe he might be referring to Google Maps http://maps.google.com/ which isn't as visually appealling as Google Earth.

Andrew Wood wrote:

Hymagumba wrote:

nwtv2003 wrote:Just downloaded it then, even though it is recommended more for Broadband users, and me being a 56k user, I still think that is bloody brilliant, makes normal Google look crap, also good graphics too.

yes, generally a 3D mapping system will make a static serach engine look crap

I believe he's referring to Google Maps http://maps.google.com/ which anyone would agree is visually crap compared to Google Earth.

pressed satillite or hybrid recently?

Neil Jones wrote:

Hymagumba wrote:Plus my house and entire town is a brown blur

Same here.

Thing to remember is that the source came from outer space. So your house is, in a nutshell, too small and insignicifiant in the grand scale of things to turn up in any great detail compared to something bigger.

I zoomed in on my house and could even see my car in the drive . The picture was a few years old. The main road into my estate was still being made. It has been finished for about 4 years now.

I tried looking for my Salon in the next town but sadly that area was a blurry splodge. Never mind! Google Earth is still fantastic and it's FREE.. Yay!!

I can see my house... quality aint great but its there. woooo

No North-Eastern locations. However the place I am staying at the moment (Bracknell) is covered.

One nice thing about Google Earth is it's attention to detail and links to webcams and stuff. As demonstrated here in this shot of Ground Zero in New York:



I like the 3D buildings effect filter.