Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica) [LWN.net]

Ars Technica reviews the Linux release of Google Earth. "A beta version of Google's popular Earth browsing application has been released for Linux. Google Earth allows users to navigate across the globe, and view detailed satellite imagery of places and buildings. On a high performance computer with a decent video card and 3D acceleration, buildings in major cities can optionally be rendered in 3D. The application also provides a number of practical features, including markers to indicate the locations of restaurants and hotels and the ability to provide driving directions."

to post comments

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 17:36 UTC (Tue) by Arker (guest, #14205) [Link] (8 responses)

As it seems this is a real QT port, rather than running under WINE.

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 17:44 UTC (Tue) by JoeF (guest, #4486) [Link] (4 responses)

That's great news, after the Picasa disappointment.

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 19:29 UTC (Tue) by hansl (subscriber, #5086) [Link] (3 responses)

Why? What's wrong with the open source Windows compatibility layer
for Linux?

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 21:10 UTC (Tue) by gnb (subscriber, #5132) [Link] (2 responses)

"Wrong" is too harsh a word, but a Win32 compatibility layer is a less
good choice than doing a full port: it will always lag the Windows version
in completeness/compatibility, and it make it easier for software vendors
to sidestep the need for a native port. Software written to Win32 will
generally appear later for Linux and often be less stable. Against that,
of course, Wine means that there will be Linux compatible versions of
applications that would never otherwise appear at all. It's not that using
Wine for Win32 is bad, but that where a vendor opts for portability as an
explicit goal instead this is to be applauded.

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 22:08 UTC (Tue) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link]

Well said.

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 22:17 UTC (Tue) by nedrichards (guest, #23295) [Link]

Agreed, but the 'later' part doesn't have to be as true if the vendor supports said compatability layer with patches (as google have done). In the end it's about priorities. I mean, I agree with you in general but in the google sense I don't really see how a WINE based port is any more likely to suffer bit rot than a Qt based port if the engineers aren't there to maintain it (being as it is closed source software).

/back on topic - good to see this awesome application on Linux though. Another reason knocked off that somebody can't give about using Windows or OS X.

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 18:02 UTC (Tue) by AndyBurns (guest, #27521) [Link] (1 responses)

Yes I have to admin I was expecting a wine cobbled version, I'ts just installed ok on FC5 for me, I'm using opensource X11 drivers so it's understandably slower compared to the win32 version, yet another reason for me to try FC6T1 when it hits the streets with the re-instated radeon r300 dri drivers :-)

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 18:07 UTC (Tue) by laccata (guest, #3856) [Link]

" Yes I have to admin"

A common disorder we all suffer from!

And there is rejoicing...

Posted Jun 13, 2006 20:00 UTC (Tue) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

It's all native Linux, until you click on the ruler, and then you discover that it's using Windows for its dialog box. (Probably not really, but beats me how it ends up displaying a Windows 95 dialog box, of all things.)

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 18:03 UTC (Tue) by ngiger@mus.ch (subscriber, #4013) [Link] (25 responses)

It is not "for Linux". It is for Linux x86. This leaves about a dozen of
other architecture out.

Needless to say it is not free (as in freedom) software. It would be nice
to see once a really free program in this area.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 18:10 UTC (Tue) by AndyBurns (guest, #27521) [Link] (2 responses)

> Needless to say it is not free (as in freedom) software.
> It would be nice to see once a really free program in this area.

Anyone working towards World Wind on Mono?
http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 21:21 UTC (Tue) by Richard_J_Neill (subscriber, #23093) [Link]

WW2D is quite promising: http://ww2d.csoft.net/

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 21:31 UTC (Tue) by zdzichu (subscriber, #17118) [Link]

Try http://download.berlios.de/ww2d/demo-linux.tar.bz2.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 18:17 UTC (Tue) by Arker (guest, #14205) [Link]

True. But at least it's better than Picasa, so one may be optimistic and deduce an improving trajectory.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 18:46 UTC (Tue) by sjj (guest, #2020) [Link] (20 responses)

My understanding is that it requires considerable CPU and video resources. What other platforms could you use anyway (apart from PPC Macs maybe)?

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth as they say.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 20:34 UTC (Tue) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link]

Well, PPC is one arch for which a version would be nice already. Also, how about a native x86-64 version? Or something for our sparc-using friends? I guess alpha, mips and parisc are less-used these days, but some people at least definitely still use them, so if the source code was available (even under a license that forbids redistribution etc.) those people could at least compile versions for their machines.

There is a lot out there that's not x86, and it's not all embedded or really big iron.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 13, 2006 20:53 UTC (Tue) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link] (3 responses)

>(apart from PPC Macs maybe)
Itanium(2), Alpha, mips, parisc. "considerable CPU and video resources"
are what these machines used to (or still) excel in.

>Don't look a gift horse in the mouth as they say.
I really wish people would stop using that as an excuse for non-free software.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 14, 2006 0:13 UTC (Wed) by mikov (guest, #33179) [Link] (2 responses)

Itanium,Alpha,Mips and PA-RISC are all completely irrelevant as a target for running desktop software such as Google Earth. x86-64 would be nice, but it is generally possible to run 32-bit x86 applications in x86-64 OS-es, so it isn't a big deal.

Face it, x86-32 is the new Java :-)

About your other comment: we all love free software, but nothing gives us the right to expect businesses to produce it for free.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 14, 2006 10:03 UTC (Wed) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link]

>Itanium,Alpha,Mips and PA-RISC are all completely irrelevant as a target for running desktop software such as Google Earth.

That may be true. Unfortunately the group that can actually give an authoritative answer on the matter, hackers using those architectures, are barred from answering that. So we'll never know.

>>I really wish people would stop using that as an excuse for non-free software.
>About your other comment: we all love free software, but nothing gives us the right to expect businesses to produce it for free.

No, but I do reserve the right to point out that it is anti-social behaviour. Google earth may come at no cost and run on GNU/Linux, but that doesn't automatically imply everything is fine.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 14, 2006 16:30 UTC (Wed) by mjr (guest, #6979) [Link]

x86-64 would be nice, but it is generally possible to run 32-bit x86 applications in x86-64 OS-es, so it isn't a big deal.

Incidentally, X.org's DRI drivers don't support 32-bit clients on a 64-bit kernel at this point.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 13, 2006 20:58 UTC (Tue) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] (11 responses)

Don't mistake corporate strategy for a gift.

If you find a bug or a frustrating feature or even a malicious feature, it is probably illegal to try to fix it, and it is definitely illegal to help your friends by sharing your fix, or society as a whole by publishing your fix.

...and just in case the law isn't enough of a deterrent, they distribute binaries that you can run but you can't read or understand.

That's no gift.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 13, 2006 23:24 UTC (Tue) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link] (5 responses)

Oh come now - I'm sure that the google hackers would be interested to know about any bugs in *their* code.

I for one am much happier to have a proprietary google earth running on linux than no google earth for linux.

A wise man once said "He who writes the code, gets to pick the license"

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 10:55 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] (4 responses)

> "He who writes the code, gets to pick the license"

So the rights of other people is a private decision of an owner?

Other than the degree of severity, this sounds like slavery.

> much happier to have a proprietary google earth

Some families sold themselves or family members into slavery by choice (or, by lack of other choices) so that they or others could get by. Again, I'm not comparing the severity, I'm just using a well known example to show that people accept, and even embrace, bad situations all the time when they are in no position to ask for a good situation.

We can fix this. If law or norms said that all software users must not be prevented from helping themselves and helping others, then software users would not be in such a weak position where they have to be happy with trading freedom for convenience/entertainment/culture.

I will reject this "gift", and I hope many others will too. Not everyone will reject it. It will be too tempting for many. To help them, we can raise awareness of the harm of losing your freedom, and we can support the development of replacement software and data archives.

a better example

Posted Jun 14, 2006 12:20 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link]

"He who creates the job, sets the terms"

...and we throw away all laws about workers' safety, minimum wage, holidays, etc.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 18:11 UTC (Wed) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link] (1 responses)

> So the rights of other people is a private decision of an owner?

If some "owner" is twisting your arm and forcing you to use google earth, you might have a case.

> Other than the degree of severity, this sounds like slavery.

That sort of rehtroic is really over the top. I appreciate your passion for the ideal, but I also recognize that this is an imperfect world, and as the philosopher Jagger once said, "you can't always get what you want".

Let's examine your dilemma: Previous to this, there was no google earth for linux, and you were free. Now a native linux google earth is available, and you can use it or refuse it, as you wish.

So you are still as free as you were before.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 20:28 UTC (Wed) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link]

>That sort of rehtroic is really over the top.

I'm not sure. There are areas where a lot of people live in intellectual poverty due to circumstances outside of their control. We hoarded (and still hoard) knowledge here even though it's trivial to duplicate and tranportable at the speed of light.
The only means they have to accessing this knowledge is by breaking the law.
It does have a lot in common with preventing literacy among certain groups in a certain period.
And just because this povery is distributed world wide and far less visible in our everyday lives it does not stop existing.

>I appreciate your passion for the ideal, but I also recognize that this is an imperfect world, and as the philosopher Jagger once said, "you can't always get what you want".

No, but if you try sometimes you might find you get what you need. And if you never try chances are you'll never succeed.

>Let's examine your dilemma: Previous to this, there was no google earth for linux, and you were free. Now a native linux google earth is available, and you can use it or refuse it, as you wish.

With the arrival of google earth there was a division into haves and have nots.
With the coming of google-earth for linux the balance of have and have nots has shifted, and the previous have-nots are saying, "What are you complaining about ? It's not *my* problem anymore."

>So you are still as free as you were before.
No, because another anti-social element has been introduced into the Free Software ecosystem.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 15, 2006 15:54 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]

> > "He who writes the code, gets to pick the license"

> So the rights of other people is a private decision of an owner?

Do people generally have an absolute right to *use* a piece of software? Of course not.

What they do have, though, is an absolute right to *refuse* to use that software for any reason they choose, and to find or create an alternative path to accomplishing the same goals. As I understand it, that's what the whole Free Software movement is all about - preserving the right of refusal and the freedom that comes with it.

You make a comparison with slavery that is extreme and unwarranted, and not simply because of the severity mismatch; a much more appropriate comparison would be with employment contracts.

If Google's licensing practices are distasteful (and I completely understand and agree with your reasons for finding them so) then by all means start a process to come up with an alternative. But Google DO have the right to choose their own terms.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 0:24 UTC (Wed) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link] (4 responses)

To me freedom means never having to hear "You're not free if you don't believe as I do!"

What a gift that would be.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 11:07 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] (3 responses)

"being free" is meaningless unless you say what freedoms you're talking about. I was talking about the freedom to study the source code and adapt it to your needs - and optionally help others by sharing your result.

There is no debate over whether or not the users of this software have that freedom. They don't.

A possible debate is whether this freedom is valuable. I say it is, and that we should expect it.

If the world was perfect, we could all bury our heads in the sand (which would probably be chocolate sand).

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 17:51 UTC (Wed) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link] (2 responses)

I don't want to study the source code. I've written and looked at tens of thousands of lines of code over the course of my life. If I wanted to I could look at millions more. At this point I know how to program. Not very well mind you, but that isnt' going to change. What I value far more highly is utility. If somebody is willing to share with me their work at no cost to myself then I'm not going to complain.

If you were hungry and a farmer offered you free food would you refuse to take it unless they also gave you their farm?

I don't deny that having source code is nice. It is however a privilige. I do not expect, let alone demand that others give away their property. I find it tiring when other people tell me I should behave in a way I find impolite and immature.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 19:45 UTC (Wed) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link] (1 responses)

You may have noticed all lines in your comment except three contain one or multiple instances of "I".

And yes, perhaps *you* don't want to study the source-code, but someone might want to even if only to make it actually work on her preferred platform.

*I* am not going to study the linux-kernel source code, but I know someone will want to. I am not going to work against this person in these endeavours by supporting closed (kernel) source.

The whole "Why should I care ? It already works for me." train of thought is destructive to the community.

If you were hungry and a farmer offered you free apples would you take if you could only have it if you promised to not give your hungry friends a part of the apples and especially not the seeds, that they may try to grow appletrees themselves ?

Also, your use of "property" is very unfortunate.

s/gift/trojan/

Posted Jun 14, 2006 19:53 UTC (Wed) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link]

"The whole "Why should I care ? It already works for me." train of thought is destructive to the community."

Your community perhaps. Certainly not mine. I'll say it again. I don't appreciate people telling me I should behave in an impolite and immature manner.

"If you were hungry and a farmer offered you free apples would you take if you could only have it if you promised to not give your hungry friends a part of the apples and especially not the seeds, that they may try to grow appletrees themselves?"

Poor analogy. In this case I would simply tell my friends where the friendly farmer was so they could go get their own food if they chose to. They would of course be free to find some other way to feed themselves if they so chose.

"Also, your use of "property" is very unfortunate."

And pretty much accurate.

Patents and DMCA like legislation are where the real problems are. Period. If you and others want to make a real difference then you'll focus your attention there. Because it is laws such as these that would prevent your friends from growing apple trees to feed themselves, not the desire of a particular farmer to not give away their farm.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 14, 2006 12:50 UTC (Wed) by Arker (guest, #14205) [Link] (2 responses)

I don't understand why you write of Linux/PPC with a wave of the hand, it counts.

I dare say there are plenty of SPARC boxes that would have no problem running the thing, were it software rather than a blob.

It wouldn't be surprising if there were Alpha and even MIPS boxes in use it would run fine on in that case as well. And of course in the case of Itanium and AMD64 there's no doubt.

Bottom line is that Linux isn't bound to a single architecture (it actually supports more architectures than NetBSD) and supporting Linux simply can't be done through binaries. Which is a feature, not a bug.

Nonetheless, it's still good to see big companies like google making attempts to support the system, however flawed, as long as they're learning and the attempts are getting better it's to be applauded.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 14, 2006 16:31 UTC (Wed) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183) [Link] (1 responses)

What I wonder is: if they've got a version working for Linux/x86, wouldn't they be able to create a PPC version just by copying the sources to a PPC machine and compiling?

As they say, the first port is the hard one, after that they get easier and easier. They've done the first two, surely the rest is trivial at this point.

Google Earth for Linux now available (Ars Technica)

Posted Jun 14, 2006 18:14 UTC (Wed) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link]

They could, if all the components and libraries they have licensed from 3rd parties are available in a suitable form, and the 3rd parties agree to release them as such.