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."
Specifically (Score:5, Insightful)
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: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.
What was that... (Score:5, Insightful)
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: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: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, thanks to the licenses we demand, all the phoning-home code can be disabled.
And since having Free Software spyware would give you nothing but bad press, no one ever tries that.
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: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: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:Native? (Score:5, Insightful)
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: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 software (with a capital Free) is a philosophical choice.
Personally, I'm in the former camp. I've even paid for binary-only Linux software on occasion, particularly with a few Windows apps I used that introduced Linux releases. I figured the best way to encourage them to keep working on the Linux versions would be to show there was a market, and that's why (for example) I was one of the first to buy a license for the Linux port of Opera (back with Opera was shareware) even though I was primarily a Mozilla user at that time, and even though it took several versions before it caught up to the Windows version in quality.
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 warn some people that the release doesn't work that well).
I get a little sick of people saying "Take the half working gesture and be happy about it," as if there weren't any point to it in the first place.
Not all Linux users care for Stallmanism. (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Where's the source? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.