For the last couple of years I’ve been writing web applications and desktop software using mapping technologies. A couple of years ago when these projects started we had to make a choice between Google Maps and Microsoft’s Virtual Earth (now called Bing Maps). At the time, Google had a much more restrictive licensing model than Microsoft. The websites and software we were developing required a subscription to plot and view the data, but free users could use the map in any way intended without requiring the user to log in or enter an email address. Google also had restrictive limits on the number of hits that your account could absorb. We went with Microsoft’s Virtual Earth and it has worked very well for us over the years and Microsoft was very forthcoming and open about their licensing and how we intended to use the technology.
Skip ahead a couple of years and I have started to look at Google and Bing again. This time it is for a site that will feature new home information and mapping. Like I said, Bing has worked well for us over the last couple years providing aerial maps for 3 web sites and 1 desktop application, so we have no real reason to switch other than to ensure they are able to provide the services we need.
Need help getting started with Google Earth? Check out Beginning Google Maps Applications with PHP and Ajax: From Novice to Professional
I started by checking Google Map’s licensing strategy, which was the deal killer for us a couple of years ago. It seems they have relaxed a lot of the per day restrictions (or eliminated them altogether). They have the same daily limit on geocoding addresses (providing the lat / long for a given street address), but the imaging is not restricted by hits. This means that you can provide the maps for your website visitors or for your applications without worry.
But wait, there’s more. Both Microsoft and Google have restrictions against charging for using the maps. In other words, you can’t use Google or Bing on a website that charges simply for using the map. You can provide basic functionality of the maps for use on your site and charge for overlays, plots, or other data that you provide. As an example, I designed a site that allows users to view Bing Maps and use all the features of it as provided by Bing. However, the customer provides data for overlays, boundaries, and plots that is proprietary to them. For that data to be displayed on the map, there is a charge. After a few calls to Microsoft, the client was able to get a clear and concise answer regarding the rules and regulations regarding Bing Maps, and the custom overlay charge was fine by them… Again, as long as users could freely use the Bing Maps general functionality as provided by Microsoft without paying for anything.
The one negative Bing has going for it is the abysmal default pins. Granted, I never use them and create custom PNG’s for the maps, but Google makes such a nice, simple pin that it would make my time spent developing the site a little less as well as providing an already well recognized image on the screen. People see it and immediately think “Oh, there’s one of what I’m looking for” instead of “What’s that gelatinous blob trying to say?”
Both offer 3d views, or Bird’s Eye View as Bing called it. They are both reasonably accurate with the plotting of geocoded points, but examples of mistakes are documented and lamented all over the net on both sides.
My Ratings:
| |
Google Maps |
Bing Maps |
| Data |
 |
|
| Developer Resources |
|
|
| Documentation |
|
|
| Browser Support |
|
|
| Accuracy |
|
|
Right now Google gets a little more exposure since Orbitz, Redfin and Trulia are all using the current version of the API on their websites. But Bing has made some serious inroads in the last year by providing more up to data data and a more relaxed licensing strategy.
Be sure and check out these amazing Google Earth references:
Subscribe