Search for content in message boards

? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 29 May 2011 7:45PM GMT
Classification: Query
I love the georeferencing capabilities of FTM 2011 BUT, I keep getting weird offsets that occur in differences between the Bing map placename locations and data that I gather from other sites like Google Maps of Scotlandsplaces.gov.

An example.. I will find very precise coordinates in Google maps for a location, enter it into FTN, then the Bing map will display the push pin about 10 miles from the location of the same name on the Bing map.

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 29 May 2011 8:53PM GMT
Classification: Query
I don't think this is the same issue you have but...

I often end up with duplicate defined place names in FTM and I've just been looking at some. Where the place name doesn't have a longitude and latitude Bing puts the push pin somewhere pretty sensible. When the same place name has a latitude and longitude the push pin tends to be offest a couple of miles in a vaguely south-easterly direction.

Bing in FTM, Bing Maps and Google Maps all consistently report the longitude and latitude in the same place so it seems that the co-ordinates in the FTM place authority aren't terribly helpful for UK place names.


Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 29 May 2011 9:01PM GMT
Classification: Query
Having tried to navigate to a location using Google coordinates, it became obvious VERY FAST that they are not that precise. They are not to be trusted. Driving in the Czech Republic up a VERY SMALL mountain path instead of on a major highway toward a VERY LARGE hotel convinced me to NOT use them any longer.

RR

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 29 May 2011 9:12PM GMT
Classification: Query
Google is programmed for the "scenic" route.
;)

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 24 Aug 2011 8:54AM GMT
Classification: Query
why has FTM changed to BING? I do not find many little locations which I found in Google map! Example: Only blurred pictures for latvia. The locations I'm looking for are not on the map. For me its a reason not to advise anymore FTM. What a pity!

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 24 Aug 2011 12:43PM GMT
Classification: Query
There are a couple of possibilities for why this might happen. It might help if you gave an example, complete with coordinates so we can try them in both.

The simplest thing I can think of is that you simply typed in a wrong number. Even one number that's bad can cause the placement to be off.

The next thing I can think of is either the conversion process from one site to the next is slightly different, or one uses decimal degrees another decimal minutes. I'm not really familiar with Bing, and I don't really do all that much with coordinates with Google.

The last way I can see, and shouldn't give really far off results, is the datums used by Google and Bing are different. A datum is basically a starting place for the center. Over the years they create a new datum and shift the location of the longitude and latitude lines. Usually this isn't very much but can cause problems, 10 miles is quite a bit though and I don't think that's the problem.

Give us an example and we might be able to figure it out.

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 24 Aug 2011 1:32PM GMT
Classification: Query

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 24 Aug 2011 5:24PM GMT
Classification: Query
In this case I see what the problem is, at least to me. Most likely there is a translation problem with the name. I ended up at Selpils, about 3 miles away.

http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=56.54971856539497~25.68...

The other problem might be that the town just does not exist on Bing maps because of its size. When zooming in I don't see any labels so it's also possible that it's not labeled and not able to be found. This is a limitation of any map and not just the difference between Google and Bing. I suspect that if you tried larger cities you'll be able to find them better, though that doesn't really help when someone lived in that small town.

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 7:13AM GMT
Classification: Query
my family were glasmakers in Latvia and they all lived in small locations all over the country. All of these locations I can find in Google Maps and nearly none in Bing. I cannot even zoom in like with Google. So I can't use Bing.

It would be nice, if I could alternatively use Google Maps instead of Bing.

By the way: Selpils and Vecselpils are not translation problems but two different locations!

For me it is a step backwards. Probably because of costs? Or why did you change to Bing?

Re: ? is anyone else having problems with Bing vs Google map coordinates?

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 12:04PM GMT
Classification: Query
In this case it seems that Google's database is much larger then Bing's. That's probably the case in a lot of areas then as I'm sure not a lot of people have much interest in that area.

You can zoom in on Bing, but there will be no labels. I've not really played with Bing at all so I don't know what you might be able to do, but can't you place pins in FTM? That might be the only thing you can do.
per page

Find a board about a specific topic

  • Visit our other sites:

© 1997-2014 Ancestry.com | Corporate Information | New Privacy | New Terms and Conditions