This topic needs a title

Newsgroups: info.grass.user
Path: ront
From: ront@picea.CFNR.ColoState.EDU (Ronald Thomas)
Subject: Re: why ARC
Sender: news@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU (News Account)
Message-ID: <CpuLu8.14zE@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 14:34:56 GMT
References: <199405150341.AA29150@solo.per.geomechanics.csiro.au>
Nntp-Posting-Host: niwot.cnr.colostate.edu
Organization: College of Natural Resources, Colo. State Univ.
Lines: 41

before I get started, how many people out
there feel Ronald's email "Why ARC/INFO over GRASS?"
is acurate?

5) Intergrated graphic output. GRASS output capabilities leave
MUCH to be desired. Right now, we have to keep a copy of GRASS4.0

I think that Ron has made a number of good points, including in particular
the database issue. On this last one (graphic output), however, I would
commend ps.map to everyone.

Simon

To Simon & -jr- and other GRASSers;

A few clarifications/explanations:

  a) We don't have a postscript driver for our HP 650C plotter, so we
  never tested ps.map output. I would have had to see some quality
  output before I requested $$ for the hardware driver. We also
  never compiled or used any of the GUI XGRASS stuff.

  b) I've never saw or heard of a definitive performance review or
  description of the various database interface tools developed
  by contributors; again, without such a review, I wasn't going to
  request $$ to buy a commercial database to be used alongside of
  GRASS.

  c) THIS ISN'T GRASS BASHING!! -jr- by all means, go ahead and
  use GRASS! It's wonderful, powerful, cheap, useful, challenging,
  worthwhile, cheap!! My original post was in response (sort of) to
  the SCS gentleman's posting that asked "why are some govt. agencies
  switching to ARC/INFO?".

Ronald Thomas ront@meeker.cfnr.colostate.edu
Natural Resource Spec. (GIS) ^^^ Phone: 303-586-1285
  Resources Management Division ^^ ^^^^^ FAX: 303-586-1310
   Rocky Mountain National Park ^^^ ^^^^^^^ Estes Park, CO 80517