Google Earth v4 Released - Linux Support at Last 433
chrisd writes "We're very happy to announce that the a new version of Google Earth has been released. It features 3D textured buildings, some neat UI updates, better internationalization and, with this release, a native Linux version is available for download as well. The Google Earth team (with the help of Ryan Gordon) worked very hard to make this possible. Please see the Earth support site and check out the BBS for more information."
Google Antifanboys Silenced (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks so much Google (Score:3, Informative)
Specifically (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Specifically (Score:2, Insightful)
It's a bit slow (because my poor lappie has no graphics acceleration to speak off), but between it and Flickr [flickr.com], I'm all set.
Re:Specifically (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Specifically (Score:5, Informative)
It is, I just downloaded it and it installs and runs beautifully without any Wine (even checked for them hiding it with ps).
Re:Specifically (Score:4, Informative)
Yes it is native... (Score:3, Informative)
I've installed it and it runs amazingly smooth and looks great.
Re:Specifically (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Thanks so much Google (Score:3, Informative)
* On the download page, there's no option to download the stable version 3 for Linux, even though system requirements are mentioned.
* So, I just downloaded & installed beta version 4 on my FC4 Athlon64 system and while it runs OK, the actual map data is all scrambled. As I zoom in/out it is constantly 'twinkling' with the wrong images. City names are dropping characters as well, so you can't even tell where you're looking when you get in close.
Nice try
Re:Thanks so much Google (Score:2)
Something was tricky here. This is the feature they needed. Hopefully it includes support for webcam overlays, so we'll be able to get some Snow Crash style CIC Globe action up in here.
Re:Thanks so much Google (Score:2, Informative)
I found it cured all my running problems.
Re:Thanks so much Google (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, mine's way more scrambled than that - initial display is all screwed, with redraws not erasing properly, on my fairly generic Dapper system (ATI Radeon card, open-source drivers). P
Re:Thanks for the FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
Google produced as part of their competitive strategy/because so many people asked for it, and the original poster is doing them a favour by trying and commenting on it (though one can always try harder to be constructive, it does wa
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Where's the source? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been using Linux for years now and I love open source software but I don't expect a software company to open their sources if it's not part of their business model.
So, thanks Google for the great job!
-DBS
Re:Where's the source? (Score:2, Insightful)
For a Windows user, you provide the binary.
For Linux/BSD people, you provide the source.
Quite simple for me. And, the results are pretty clear -- if you run that random gizmo you found somewhere, you're guaranteed to get pwned in no more than several of gizmos. And even the very OS keeps sending your private data everywhere (WGA anyone)? In the opposite corner, you have sources you can review. Of course, it's really unlikely you'll look inside, but in the case of problems, someone will. And, than
Not all Linux users care for Stallmanism. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Where's the source? (Score:5, Funny)
I have a complaint. I have all this Linux kernel source code crap on my system and I can't understand a damn word of it.
Re:Where's the source? (Score:2)
Yes, fans and very concervative free software users usually stick with "f you won't provide source, you got nothing from me" and sometimes they are right. Sometimes they are wrong. J
Re:Where's the source? (Score:2)
f you won't provide source, you got nothing from me"
To which I wish Google would reply: "Then don't download the program you pains in the asses." If you ask me, that would be the proper response. Hell, it might even be too nice.
I run linux, I like open source--but I don't have a public cry about it if somebody who puts a ton of work into giving me a native port of their already-free software doesn't feel it is in their best interests to also release the source.
They'll whine in considerable detail a
Re:Where's the source? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure you can. Provide the source and either maintain it, or hand it to someone who will. Problem solved.
Of course, you are oversimplifying things. There are two camps of Linux users on this issue: those who are OK with binary apps, for some purposes at least, and those for whom Free
Re:Where's the source? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Where's the source? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now there's progress. (Score:3, Funny)
Segmentation fault
$
Re:Now there's progress. (Score:5, Funny)
I would take any necessary precations.
Mac Sketchup (free) (Score:5, Informative)
More info on Sketchup [google.com] - it's basically a super-intuitive CAD program for quickly getting 3D ideas down on paper.
Re:Mac Sketchup (free) (Score:2)
One company to rule them all... (Score:5, Funny)
Well, it finally happened... Google took over. But it's one thing to take the planet over, but quite another to provide support for it too. Man, I'd hate to be be at the other end of the support line... wonder if you need to run the standard Google employment gauntlet to be first-tier support?
Re:One company to rule them all... (Score:3, Funny)
That actually explains a lot...
Linux support? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Linux support? (Score:3, Insightful)
Running unknown Windows binary blobs -> qemu[1], or you'll get pwned.
Running unknown Linux binary blobs -> qemu, or you'll get pwned.
[1] Or vmware, if you somehow prefer them. At least, they don't have any business relationships.
So, uhm, what's the difference?
And, as Google self-admittedly _does_ send home whatever data it can find about you, I'm not really rushing to install their binary on my box. Outside of a sandbox of some kind, at least.
Check out the "Build 3D Models" Link! (Score:5, Informative)
"SketchUp is a simple but powerful tool for quickly and easily creating, viewing and modifying your 3D ideas.
* Click on a shape and push or pull it to create your desired 3D geometry.
* Experiment with color and texture directly on your model.
* Real-time shadow casting lets you see exactly where the sun falls as you model.
* Select from thousands of pre-drawn components to save time drawing.
And once you've built your models, you can place them in Google Earth, post them to the 3D Warehouse, or print hard copies. Google SketchUp is free for personal use. No registration is required."
What was that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Check out the "Build 3D Models" Link! (Score:2)
Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:2, Interesting)
Its not that I don't trust google, but I run Gentoo and don't have many binaries install at all. This might become more common in the future, so how should I protect myself from malicious binaries?
Re:Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't them as root.
How is a binary unsafe but somehow source code is? I have a hard time believing you audit the code for everything that Gentoo installs. Why is a mirror offering up source code somehow trusted, but binaries aren't?
Re:Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:2)
Because in Gentoo, a hash of the source tarball is integrated into the package system. The tarball might be downloaded from anywhere, but if the hashes don't match you have a different file than the package maintainer used, and it won't be installed.
Re:Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:5, Insightful)
That doesn't tell you that it's safe, it tells you that it's the same thing the package maintainer used. All it means is you're passing the responsibility for auditing up the chain to the package maintainer.*
Now, the package maintainer for your distro may audit the code themselves, or they may rely on similar hashes/signatures to make sure that the source they use is the same as the source the project itself provides. In which case that's passing the buck up once again.
So really, what you're doing is relying on the original source to be safe...so it's not much different than relying on the original binary to be safe. It comes down to this: Do I trust the provider of this software? Inclusion in a distro can be seen as a vote of confidence: Gentoo includes app X, implying that Gentoo believes X is not going to take over my machine. You can choose to believe that anything included in your distro is likely to be safe, or rather that anything unsafe in it is unsafe by accident and not deliberately. (Choosing otherwise makes it a hell of a lot harder to build and maintain a system, though it can certainly be done.)
But hash checks and GPG signatures don't tell you that an app is safe, whether you download it as source or as a binary. They only tell you that it hasn't been altered.
*Note that the same is true for RPM-based distros like Fedora or SuSE -- packages are signed with GPG, and it won't install if the signature doesn't validate -- and I would assume for Debian-derived distros as well. This isn't a distro war issue.
Re:Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:2, Insightful)
Being able to examine the code is far better than not being able to at all.
Re:Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:2)
My problem with a .bin install is that it doesn't work with my package-management system, and that I don't know (without taking it apart) what the install is doing. Who knows where it's installing or what other files it's modifying during the install process?
I generally don't worry about malicious code when I'm getting it from sources I trust, but I do worry about the "helpful" or "smart" installation code that thinks it knows better than I do about how I want something set up on my computer. Also, what ha
Re:Its true, it is a binary. What should I do now? (Score:2)
Close your eyes, click your heels together three times, then pretend that you've blindly compiled these binaries from source yourself, like you normally do, and proceed from there.
NASA WorldWind also ready for Linux and MacOSX (Score:5, Informative)
"NASA is currently making plans for World Wind 1.5 [worldwindcentral.com]. This version will be available for multiple platforms, including Windows, Linux and the Macintosh."
Re:NASA WorldWind also ready for Linux and MacOSX (Score:2, Informative)
There is also a World WInd clone written by Pat Murris - WW2D Plus One [worldwindcentral.com] (homepage [alpix.com]) written in Java.
It's obviously quite simplistic however it is a 3D world viewer and can use the same imagery as World Wind, so it's a start and certainly something to use if you want to see the good-looking Next Generation Blue Marble imagery for one thing :)
Re:NASA WorldWind also ready for Linux and MacOSX (Score:3, Interesting)
Google:
http://earth.google.com/images/mtsth.jpg [google.com]
Worldwind:
http://www.worldwindcentral.com/wiki/images/b/b6/S rtm.jpg [worldwindcentral.com]
high quality buildings & overlays? (Score:2)
But does it work in Linux? (Score:2)
Ubuntu 5.10
Suse 10.1
Fedora Core 5
Linspire 5.1
Gentoo 2006.0
Debian 3.1
Red Hat 9
I just tested it and it works but sporadically crashes under RHEL3 (Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3). The crash said that it would be sending details to google regarding the crash, but I didn't see any notice about it when I next started googleearth.
Re:But does it work in Linux? (Score:2)
Even under 64 bit Linux (Score:2)
Nice going google.
Yes it IS native. (Score:5, Informative)
One other chap who worked at Loki then moved on to Epic Software and brought us NATIVE ports of UT2003 and UT2004.
It's definitely native.
Thanks to Gordon and I hope you had fun working with the folks at Google.
This is indeed a great day, google earth was the only app I ever used on my laptop under Windows.
Yeah, it's not perfect yet, read the forums, play around with it, tweek it and it'll go.
Re:Yes it IS native. (Score:2)
Really... Linux newbie here and I've no idea how to actually get the .bin file to install or run.
Google itself provides absolutely no instructions on installing or running. I guess they assume that if you know Linux, you know how to install it and don't need instructions.
Re:Yes it IS native. (Score:2)
Only native x86. I don't see any native amd64/x86-64, sparc etc. versions.
NASA's World Wind [nasa.gov] offers some hope for non-x86 platforms, but it's a way off yet.
Re:Yes it IS native. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Yes it IS native. (Score:2)
BSD? (Score:3, Funny)
Real Time Imagery for Google Earth (Score:4, Interesting)
They wanted to see what their neighbors were doing, or see where their kids were, etc. Nevermind the sunbathers behind the super high fence.
But they still liked the product even if they didn't have those features. I imagine it would be very popular if they could get the features they thought they had.
Works on Fedora Core 5 (Score:3, Interesting)
Just tried it with Fedora Core 5 (with ATI radeon drivers). Installed with no issues, works fine and works fast. I'm impressed! Thanks Google.
(note - I don't think it's using Wine... couldn't see any Wine related stuff in the process list...)
Neat! (Score:2)
More best-in-class apps for the Linux desktop (Score:3, Informative)
Things are looking up for the Linux desktop, and for best-in-class software that runs on it. It's an exciting time to be a Linux fan, no?
Crashes on startup (Score:3, Informative)
Earth To Linux! (Score:3, Funny)
Well it seemed funny to me anyways.
Works on Mandriva 10.2 + Intel 3D (Score:2)
So, I can't go to 1600x1200, I could even be stuck at 800x600 until the next stable comes out. I'll cope, it's a mighty effort made and I appreciate the heck out of it.
Linux morons (Score:3, Funny)
Basically people, "beep beeeeep" and get a life. You guys grab any opportunity to tell the world you are "cool" because you use Linux but all you do is complain while playing Windows games in a dark corner when nobody is looking and if you don't like Google Earth....
DON'T BLOODY USE IT!
"Not more than a finite number of times" (Score:5, Funny)
Why does the Google Pack EULA [google.com] ask me to agree not to do something that's physically impossible?
From the Google Pack EULA [google.com]:
Who in this universe has an infinite number of computers, or would install a piece of software an infinite number of times? Why don't also they require me to agree not to perform an infinite number of other impossible tasks? Why are so concerned about preventing people with infinite numbers of computers and patience installing their software?
-Don
A few observations (Score:3, Informative)
- This seems to be a binary package only, which uses a few common libraries beneath it
- Installs without a hitch on my system, defaults to
- Runs very smooth in Ubuntu 6.06 AMD 64 bit with nvidia driver, but it seems to need root permissions to start (installed with sudo on the 'binary' installer)
- No real desktop integration yet (at least with Gnome)
- Asks to install symlink in
- Probably not a good idea to run with nv driver in X, chech your
- Comes with nice Icon that works in Gnome in root of installation folder
Oh, I got a rather new 3GHz AMD 64/1 Gig, budget (fanless) videocard and 6 Mbit download. Not top of the bill, but quite nice anyway, your experiences may differ.
Unfortunately, it does not seem to be open source. A bit of a shame, the real work is in the infrastructure and obtaining the maps anyway.
Watch out for CVE-2006-2193 (Score:4, Insightful)
LIBTIFF, Version 3.7.3
From CVE-2006-2193 [mitre.org]: While I doubt Google Earth will be calling this function, this goes to show the danger that users place themselves in when they run software that takes it upon itself to bundle together the libraries that it depends on.
I'm curious... (Score:3, Interesting)
Knowing Google, however, version 3 probably never left beta.
In fact, is anything Google makes besides the search engine NOT beta? Google Groups has been beta since what, 2001? Their use of the word has completely lost any meaning, other than the obvious lawyerese intent of absolving them of any responsibility in case the stuff doesn't work. Like anyone ever takes that responsibility anyway (Microsoft?).
Still, it's cool software.
how hard was the port? (Score:3, Interesting)
What I'm interested in -- how hard was it to port this over to Linux? What about the DirectX->OpenGL transition? How was this done? How much of the source code could be reused? Is there a common code base at all, and if so, will future Windows/Mac/Linux versions of Google Earth be developed (and released) based on that from now on? And how hard would it be to provide binaries for non-x86 Linux, and/or other Unixes?
Any non-classified information on those things? :-)
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:2, Funny)
-DBS
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:5, Informative)
For the rest of us, take a GPS datalogger when boating, biking, driving, etc. Then import the data into Google Earth to have a satellite image with your trek pre-drawn on it.
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:2)
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:3, Interesting)
I had a first date planned with someone (this was about 349 days ago, before she became my girlfriend, then fiance); I was supposed to go to an area of town I've not often frequented; worse, the directions were confusing (lots of cloverleaf intersections and the like).
I put it into Google Earth, had it show me the directions AND what the streets actually look like, and this really helped me understand the directions. Does that count?
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds like the beginnings of a marketing campaign, if I ever heard one...
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Can someone please tell me.. (Score:2)
Re:Native? (Score:2)
Re:Native? (Score:2)
The term native would imply that it's a complete port to the X Window System. This clearly is not. Whether or not an individual cares about the API details isn't relevant to this thread. The point the original poster was making was simply this is not a "native" port.
Re:Native? (Score:2)
Which is daft. It's written using Qt and OpenGL: I really fail to understand what makes a native Linux port so difficult!
Re:Native? (Score:2)
Re:Native? (Score:2)
That isn't true. (Score:5, Informative)
Chris
Re:That isn't true. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Native? (Score:5, Informative)
(I COULD be wrong, of course, but icculus is a fairly major native Linux porter, so I'd doubt that he'd be working on a wine port.)
Re:Native? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Native? (Score:4, Funny)
Given Qt's close association with KDE, and the naming conventions that have arisen for KDE apps, "clunKy" or "Klunky" sound like appropriate terminology.
Re:Native? (Score:2)
And your point is?
Re:Native? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not at a better time... (Score:3, Informative)
Still, i'm very pleased that google have chosen to put the time and effort they have into their recent linux ports, this will be far more useful... ok, maybe just fun then, than picasa.
Re:What's the point? (Score:3, Funny)
Yes.
Re:What's the point? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm trying not to troll here but I don't really "get" the point of Google Earth. I understand that it's cool to look around cities and famous places but is that it? Am I missing something?
I feel a little bad for you. Don't you experience any sort of wonder and amazement that you can look at just about any point on the planet, all from the comfort of your own chair? I mean, even if it wasn't useful for getting maps, creating driving routes, and all that, isn't it still an amazing achievement to you? GoogleEarth is a significant cultural and technological achievement.
And how fitting that Google, of all companies, has provided this free of charge to everyone on Earth.
The fact that GoogleEarth exists at all is the point.
This is no offense to you, personally, but how sad is it that, in our modern era, we can create stunning accomplishments that overshadow any and all accomplishments in the entirety of human history and so many of us still have the lack of appreciation to say "That's it?".
Re: (Score:2)
There's 4 versions of Google Earth (Score:5, Informative)
There are 4 versions of Google Earth. Most people know about the free version only. The other Google Earth versions [google.com] gives you way more features, including GIS-like features [wikipedia.org].
Re:What's the point? (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, video producers have already started using apps like this in their films... "Loose Change: Second Edition", anyone?
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Sure, it'd be even bette
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
* Because it's a native app rather than Web 2.0, it's snappier.
* There's an interface for making lists of points. For example, it's easy to create "this is my house" and "this is my office" places. That makes getting directions more convenient.
* Navigating in cities, the ability to see the buildings in 3D and get a ground-level perspective can be really useful in driving. It can be hard to figure out exactly what some directions mean just from the des
Re:What's the point? (Score:4, Insightful)
There is more to the world we live in than "cities and famous places". I can spend hours and hours on Google Earth, just looking at mountains in the Rockies or Andes for example. The physical world interests me, landforms, geology, physical geography in general. To me, Google Earth is one of the most significant pieces of educational software ever released on any format. Someone in Ohio or Oostende can gain an appreciation of the landforms of Papua New Guinea, fly through the Grand Canyon or explore the Antarctic Peninsula without ever leaving their desks, things they will probably never get a chance to do in real life.
The question you ask is analogous to asking "what's the point of any form of learning that doesn't further our everyday lives?".
Answer: "Some people find it interesting." If software formats and web 2.0 are more interesting to you than the High Himalayas, then that's your bag (...), but you have to appreciate that other's tastes and interests vary.
Re:What's the point? (Score:5, Informative)
OK, first things first. I am serving in the Army as an enlisted Military Policeman. Currently stationed at Fort Hood in the 1st Cavalry Division, I came back from a 1 year tour in Iraq in early/mid 2005. In Baghdad the military is using a "new" tool (that DARPA has been working on for a number of years) that easily allows collaborative efforts and battle tracking. (I just googled for it, and the name is out in the open with a nice description of it on defense-update.com ... so it _appears_ that I am not "talking out of school" here.)
Anyway, last year around April/May the Cav returns back to the states, we get a little down time, turn most of our trucks and tanks to be "Reset" (rebuilt/refurbished/updated) ... and catch a nice little breather when Katrina hits. The 82nd Airborne gets to New Orleans first (after the National Guard and reserves) and then the Cav.
Being an enlisted Military Policeman gave me a unique perspective to what was going on... and more importantly what was NOT going on. When I worked in Baghdad my job was to coordinate efforts between the Coalition Forces and the Iraqi Police. We tracked what the Iraqi Police were seeing on the Streets and what the military was seeing on the streets and tried to keep everybody on the same page.
Low and behold when I get to New Orleans I discover that I have the PERFECT skill set for this disaster. Military and Law Enforcement experience, VERY knowledgeable on how to push and pull information to and from everybody who needs it, dealing with ALL flavors of law enforcement and coordinating efforts on the fly.
One problem. I don't have a tool to put the coordination together. However, most places (hospitals, Police Stations, FBI, DEA, NYFD, Customs, and the FEMA coordination centers) all have Internet access. Guess what. We have the perfect tool... Google Earth.
Google had recently worked there ASSES off putting current and updated flood information into Google Earth, you could pull up where downed power lines and flooded roads were at, you could transpose the "pre flood" and the "post flood" images, and the downtown area even had 3D models of the buildings.
Oh, and IT WAS FREE... and easy to use... And you can EASILY share information between other people. I put an icon in my Google Earth .KML describing a dead body that needs to be picked up and the proper agencies (who are "subscribed" to my .KML) see that information in SECONDS (or minutes at the latest). There were a limited number of people there who could legally move bodies according to LA law so it was a constant effort to get them to where they needed to be.
You add a VOIP aspect to it and POOF! Instant command and control for the different agencies. It is nigh-impossible to crash google's servers and as long as you had power (which was rapidly becoming a NON issue) and Internet access (same thing) you were able to talk and coordinate your efforts.
The beauty of the system is that as long as each agency updates their little piece of the pie everybody can see and use that data... Even if they don't update it, there was so much overlap that someone would see and report an incident.
One other problem. We are dealing with the CIVILIAN government and FEMA here. They have a major case of "It wasn't grown here"-itis. Everybody I showed it to was amazed and astounded with how easy and efficient it was... and the power of collaboration was something completely new and foreign to almost EVERYBODY involved... except for the 1st Cav. FEMA seems hell bent to spend MILLIONS of dollars setting up a command and control center that only talked to itself... AMAZING. I showed their tech people and some higher ups what Google Earth could bring to the plate and they were impressed. The tech types were ready and willing to embrace the tool, but hesitant because t
Re:Hmm . . . Earth (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia... (Score:2)
Re:Oh, the Irony! (Score:4, Insightful)
People have been repeating the "it'll never work" assertion since, well, forever, yet every day more stuff works. Reconcile that.