View Full Version : NASA World Wind

2006-Mar-13, 02:20 AM
Since the BA plugged World Wind in his blog, and I had (temporary and brief) access to broadband, I decided to download it. I had very little time to play but only found very low resolution. I couldn't even see large buildings in downtown Seattle. Google Earth, on the other hand, allows me to see individual players in Seahawks Stadium. (What game is that, by the way?)

I suspect World Wind is better than that and I'm doing something wrong. But what?

2006-Mar-13, 04:03 AM
I'm not really sure - I tried it and had the same problem - MUCH lower resolution than GE. In GE, I can see the tree in our backyard, in WW, I can barely tell which street is the one I live on.

Anyone know if we're doing anything wrong?

2006-Mar-17, 01:06 AM
With apologies in advance, I'm going to bump this just once in the hope that someone can answer the question! If the BA was so impressed with World Wind, and I was not, I figure I must be doing something wrong. What was it?

2006-Mar-18, 07:11 AM
I tried WorldWind over a year ago, and it was fantastic - real hi-res pictures. I could see individual people around the Washington Monument, cars on the Golden Gate bridge... The one of the new versions did something, and it's been rubbish ever since. I've tried fiddling with proxy settings and the like, but it's never been as high-res for me as it was initially.
So, to answer your question.... don't know.

2006-Mar-18, 08:05 AM
Well, I think I figured it out. At the top of the screen in world wind, there are several icons. Some of these icons are labeled with the names of different satellites. If you pick different satellites, you will get different images. If you pick the USGS urban area (ortho) button, you can easily see people and cars in Washington DC.

However, for some strange reason, the US capitol is blurred out. I don't see why, but someone did (it doesn't serve much purpose, as it is crystal clear on google earth)

2006-Mar-18, 09:42 PM
Yes, that's better. I still don't like it as well as GE, scrolling seems particularly awkward.

2006-Mar-18, 11:30 PM
I agree - I still prefer GE, but at least now you can see more than just detail on the 10m scale.

2006-Mar-19, 12:43 AM
I think that world wind's strenght is in the various scientific data that can be overlayed onto the maps. Google could do that as well, but they haven't yet as far as I know.

2007-Jan-06, 06:19 PM
World Wind 1.4.0 RC3 (06 Jan 2007)

New Features/Fixes in 1.4

* Plugin: Movie Recorder (added avi xport)
* Plugin: Place Finder Loader (Supports more geocoders)
* Plugin: Satellite Tracker
* Plugin: Virtal Earth, downloads Microsoft local live data (must be loaded from the plugins menu, then activated by clicking the toolbar icon)
* Plugin: Improved WMS browser with GetCapabilities support
* Plugin: Waving flags
* Plugin: GPS Tracker
* Plugin: Animated 3D Clouds
* Plugin: Measure tool NG (unstable)
* Data: New NRL data
* Data: Boundaries served by WMS
* Data: WFS placenames
* Core: Added what's new in 1.4 page to coniguration wizard
* Core: New accurate sunshading
* Core: Support for 3D models
* Core: Atmosphere (Improved with atmospheric scattering)
* Core: Added widget support
* Core: Internal HTML Browser
* Core: Camera shakes/jitters/jumps fixed
* Widget: New scalebar
* Widget: Time controller
* Widget: 3D compass widget
* Installer: Removed background
* Installer: Mars, Moon, SDSS icons removed
* Installer: .Net 2.0 check
* Installer: Added command line tags NODOTNET, /NODX, /NOMDX) to skip detection of .NET, DirectX 9.0c, and Managed DirectX, to skip checks respectively.

(21.97mb download)

Read more (http://www.worldwindcentral.com/wiki/World_Wind_1.4_Bug_List_For_Release#World_Wind_1.4 .0_RC3_.2806_Jan_2007.29)

2007-Jan-06, 09:27 PM
Sorry, but Google Earth continues to rule, hands down, not just in resolution, but because of the additional features.

Bye-bye, World-wind.

2007-Jan-07, 05:07 AM
you are not aware of all the plugins that are available for worldwind.
It can be configured to access the same data as google earth, and it has more features than GE.
The real bonus, for me, is that worldwind is not constrained by a 2 Gb cache limit.

I personally prefer WW, but i also run GE on my system. GE is better for handling/creating layers and KMZ files, i find.

BTW, I`ve been testing the new release out, and this WW release is actually quite stable and functional. (worth downloading)

2007-Jan-07, 10:46 AM
They're both rubbish for where I live. MS Live Local has good imagery of some parts of round here, though.

2007-Jan-08, 10:27 PM
Google Earth, on the other hand, allows me to see individual players in Seahawks Stadium. (What game is that, by the way?)

Sorry to not notice this earlier.

The game that was photographed was one of 3 (possible).
Notice the WSU logo at the 50-yard line. Washington State University plays 1 game, per season, at Qwest field, so that narrows it down considerably.

1. Due to other aspects of Seattle it can't be from before 2002 (or so I've heard)
2. Saturday 8/31/2002 Nevada vs. WSU
3. Saturday 8/30/2003 Idaho v. WSU
4. Saturday 9/11/2004 Colorado v. WSU
5. Google Earth came on-line before the fall of 2005.

The consensus among the WSU Cougar nation is that it is the Idaho game. Some Cougar fans have even recalled that particular series of plays, that day, versus Idaho.

(I am a WSU alum, so I have known about this view of Qwest field for quite some time, now, and have taken great interest.)

8/30/2003 in the mid-afternoon -- 3.5 years -- it's time to update the database!

2007-Jan-08, 11:09 PM
yeah, The word on the street says that the google image was either the game against Nevada on August 31, 2002, or the game against Idaho, on August 30, 2003.

(the attachment is an updated WW image)