[Openstreetmap] The bigger picture
immanuel.scholz at gmx.de
Tue Feb 14 17:27:46 GMT 2006
> For example, it's currently not possible to get the tile renderer to
> produce images bigger than the current tile size. It would be nice to
> offer bigger images but we don't for performance reasons.
I am not sure about this is for performance reason..
> Perhaps we could offer a hi-res image rendering service for a small fee...
> it wouldn't change the licensing and it would help pay for hosting.
This commercial model is flawed.
If there is a need for bigger maps (which is), and if it is possible to
provide the service for less cost (there is: when you don't have to pay
for the server), then there will be an offer for this.
People will show up with free map generators (and why not?).
(Usually this people don't want to destroy OSM, but they want free hi-res
The only "advantage" OSM has when selling this kind of stuff is, that
everyone who buys their goods also donate a little bit of money along to
fund the server. So why do it this complicated and not just seperate the
two things? Make the service free and provide a paypal for donations. You
save a lot of grief with other people providing your services for free.
>> I honestly don't see any difference to my above suggestion, and the
>> selling of the London Poster.
London Posters are much more of value BECAUSE people owning them know that
with buying, they also donated money. I think all the poster, T-Shirt etc.
Stuff ARE just masked donations.
This is not bad, but fundamental different from providing a service many
people want to have without donating. "Donation" is always voluntary.
> The whole point of the London poster for me is that:
> * Steve and I did it first
> * it captures a particular moment of OpenStreetMap
> * we went out of our way to make sure it was printed nicely
> * anyone could make one
> * if you buy one from me and Steve, the money goes to OpenStreetMap
Yea, excactly what I said. Having such a Poster is cool, not only because
there is just a picture of London on it, but of all the other stuff that
is associated with it. THAT is something other people cannot provide and
THAT is, what osm could 'sell'.
But a service providing nice maps for homepages is IMHO not a "fan
> Note that the code to make it isn't Free, and we didn't distribute the
> digital format. The paper maps are licensed in the same way as the
> OpenStreetMap source data.
I think, this is only a small barrier. Your effort scale linear with the
effort of other people have, doing the same. So you cannot build up a
large enough advantage in this way to prevent other people from "stealing"
Except if you are trolltech, of course. They can sell QT, since they have
the power to outcode any competitors ;)
More information about the talk