Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Adds Satellite Imagery for the World

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the they're-just-making-that-stuff-up dept.

Google 551

draevil writes "Google has hugely expanded the areas of the world that it covers with satellite imagery. Egypt, Iraq, mainland Europe and the UK have all now got satellite coverage to a lesser or greater degree. Slashdotters can now go see sights like Buckingham Palace or the Arc de Triomphe from the comfort of their own swivelchairs. Iraq in particular seems to have a large number of high-zoom areas. I just looked up the Baghdad Parade Grounds where Saddam used to take the salute and other towns like Fallujah are also there. Finding landmarks without the map content is a little harder, so what can the Slashdot crowd find?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Dupe Post! (1, Offtopic)

nokilli (759129) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912849)

Dupe [slashdot.org]

Re:First Dupe Post! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912860)

Nope.. this is satellite imagery.. not just google maps showing more than north america in an ocean.

Re:First Dupe Post! (2, Insightful)

nokilli (759129) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912875)

The earlier story covered satellite imagery too. This is just more butt-buddiness between Google and the /. editors.

Slashdot has stock in Google (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912983)

'Mus be true, because every day it's


"Google releases google google google Summer of Code google google google Do No Evil (TM) google google google google and google the google over google who's your daddy ? Google and the googly-google google inside google...etc ad nauseum"


Show me the way to the vomitoreum...

Re:First Dupe Post! (2, Informative)

pdbaby (609052) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912862)

This isn't a dupe. The previous update didn't allow you to zoom in so close on, for example, London.

First to find.... (5, Funny)

Mister Impressive (875697) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912853)

First to find the weapons of mass destruction (in Iraq) wins 2 cookies and a free can of soda redeemable at the cafetorium!

Re:First to find.... (2, Funny)

HG2 (878937) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912899)

Re:First to find.... (1, Funny)

Beardydog (716221) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912945)

This isn't a satellite close-up of the Goatse guy, is it?

Re:First to find.... (0, Redundant)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913026)

I found some weapons.

Oops! Those WMDs are the USA.

Re:First to find.... (1)

Nexcet (792231) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913039)

if dudes in US can't find it..what is it to even look like? btw, nice one ^_^

Firefox problems? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912855)

Is it just me or do these links to google maps never work in firefox? I just get a big grey box. When I load with IE it works fine. Is this a problems with my setup because google maps has never worked right for me.

Re:Firefox problems? (5, Funny)

nokilli (759129) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912861)

I just get a big grey box
Must have typed in Madonna. Don't do that.

Re:Firefox problems? (1)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912871)

Works fine for me.(ff version 1.0.4) Wait for the data to load, and/or zoom out.

Re:Firefox problems? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912940)

I had the same problem, but then I looked under "Edit/Preferences/Web Features". Next to "Enable JavaScript" there is a button "Advanced" where you have to say that you allow the website to "modify images". After that it worked fine.

I Found... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912857)

The Pyramids of Giza! Oh wait, no...

The Great Wall of China! Oh wait, no...

The Sydney Opera House! Oh wait, no...

Seriously, can we please stop shitting ourselves everytime Google makes the smallest tweak?

No wonder people are saying the Make Blog is the new Slashdot...

Re:I Found... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913061)

Are you kidding? 35 years living here and my city is full of huge grey square areas that I had never been aware of! I really must visit those one of these days.

i wouldn't be surprised... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912858)

if you could see cowboyneal's fat ass in one of those satelite images

Re:i wouldn't be surprised... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912882)

I think you're confused. That's his fat camel you're seeing near Baghdad, not his fat ass!

Looking around Paris... (2, Interesting)

cvd6262 (180823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912863)

Why is the north side of the Conciergerie whited out?

Re:Looking around Paris... (2, Funny)

Solder Fumes (797270) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912874)

To conceal the underarm hair.

Re:Looking around Paris... (2, Informative)

cvd6262 (180823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912876)

Oops. Here's the link [google.co.uk] .

Re:Looking around Paris... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913013)

looks like a solar reflection (unlike the White House's roof). Seems that the 55, faubourg Saint Honoré [google.co.uk] is not whitened out, why should the Conciergerie be ?

Re:Looking around Paris... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912889)

because they put a big sheet of tarp over it

Re:Looking around Paris... (1)

roseblood (631824) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913021)

That's an intense reflection of sunlight off that portion of the roof.

Hey... (4, Funny)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912865)


I can see my house from here!

Re:Hey... (5, Funny)

Lefty2446 (232351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912898)

Duh! Look past the monitor!

Adrian

Re:Hey... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912962)

You can see EVERYONEs house from here!, Everyone on the PLANET.
This is the most brilliant thing I have seen on the web..can't wait for the resolution to improve all over.
Thank you Google /A google map addict.
Try and find Ayers Rock (Uluru), see how bit it (and central Oz) is.
Find the start of the Amazon, There's a lot of forest out there..

Re:Hey... (1)

ejito (700826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912966)

I can see my grandma's old Mustang parked outside where I used to live. The images are pretty old in some areas. I'll start to get worried when they add 24/7 live images.

WHAT A DUMBA$$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913014)

I can see my house from here,too.And I'm not on google.

Interesting Pic Collection (4, Interesting)

XanC (644172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912869)

Make sure to submit the kewl links you find to:

http://perljam.net/notes/interesting-google-satell ite-maps/ [perljam.net]

Pictures of the Oslo/Norway isnt' too good. (1)

arcade (16638) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912873)

Some of it is low quality, and some of it is covered with clouds and shadows on the ground .. and some of it is taken from ridiculous angels, making everything look funny. :)

Hope they'll improve the coverage of Oslo given some time. :)

Re:Pictures of the Oslo/Norway isnt' too good. (5, Funny)

Solder Fumes (797270) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912883)

Some of it is low quality, and some of it is covered with clouds and shadows on the ground .. and some of it is taken from ridiculous angels, making everything look funny. :)

"Michael! Every shot in this roll of film has your finger in it!"

Re:Pictures of the Oslo/Norway isnt' too good. (1)

arcade (16638) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912895)

:-) angles, my bad, and thanks for pointing that out for me.

Re:Pictures of the Oslo/Norway isnt' too good. (1)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912908)

It's all the moose. My sister was bitten by a moose once.

Re:Pictures of the Oslo/Norway isnt' too good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913052)

Wow, I didn't even know that they had moose in europe until you mentioned it! Which led me to wikipedia, and discovering some cool animals like the okapi and the irish elk. ThankS!

Different resolutions/scans (4, Interesting)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912881)

It's a bit disconcerting to zoom out on, say, the US in satellite view, and see the whole state of New York a different color than its surroundings. This disparity is the same at all scales, presumably because of more recent satellite scans of that highly-populated and more-often-imaged area. Can they meld one region into another, without losing detail, and get rid of such effects?

Re:Different resolutions/scans (3, Insightful)

sweetaction (649666) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912918)

Not without a lot of time and effort. Different weather, land color tones and cameras all play into it. Imagine working with massive 100gig images in photoshop. Not going to work. Companies out there will spend time doing it, but you pay for it. A lot of imagary is free from the government. But doing something with it is where the effort comes in.

Boring! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912885)

Someone please post hot StarTrek TNG lesbian erotica, instead.

Oh, and I don't like Tasha, so please only post stories with Deanna and Beverly and maybe some hot young ensigns (with small but perky breasts).

Re:Boring! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912900)

Robin Lefler and the Bajoran babe from Lower Decks!

with apologies to Zonk (1, Funny)

AEton (654737) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912886)

Is it just me, or does the Arc de Triomphe [google.com] look a whole lot like the Eye of Sauron?

Streched Images? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912887)

Can anyone tell me why the satellite images are stretched horizontally?

It's not so obvious for most compass-oriented stuff, but take a look at Manhattan [google.com] . Its rectangular city blocks are clearly skewed, and the satellite image definitely doesn't match the map view.

This is also visible whenever you are looking at circular features [google.com] , which appear as ovals.

I can't imagine that this is some limitation of satellite imagery or something they can't easily fix, so that leaves the possiblilty that they are doing it intentionally. But, why?

Re:Streched Images? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912941)

Actually, looking at it more closely, the satellite images are smushed vertically (the width matches the maps but the height doesn't), but my question still stands.

Why is it like that?

Re:Streched Images? (3, Informative)

nokilli (759129) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912957)

Map view implies a perspective from directly above the area in question.

Satellite view on the other hand uses whatever perspective afforded by the position of the satellite. It isn't always directly overhead, you know.

So they have to translate one perspective onto another.

The real question is, do they get to know where the satellite was when it took each photo in question, or do they arrive at the matrix in some other way?

Re:Streched Images? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913003)

That's a good theory, but it doesn't work out. If it did, then the satellite images would rarely line up to the maps (except in the few places they used as references to each other).

Take my link in Manhattan, and drag the view a few screens away. Then switch to the other mode.

The center of the image still lines up, so clearly the map and satellite coordinates DO correspond to each other.

So, even if the satellite image is skewed because of its angle when taken (which is probably a lot worse than what we are seeing), why don't they simply adjust it to match for display?

Re:Streched Images? (1)

helioquake (841463) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913051)

why don't they simply adjust it to match for display?

Because these images probably do not come with proper geological coordinate system?

These images are taken from satellite; you need the spatial coordinate of a satellite which took these images, and then reproject it onto the tangential plane, then convert that to non-linear coordinate scheme that the original map uses. These maths aren't too complicated (ok, it will take me days to work out), but getting all the information necessary to perform that conversion may take a while.

Re:Streched Images? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913064)

Um. I'll rephrase what I said in thepost you replied to.

When you drag the image, the center of the views always lines up. That means they know where every pixel in the sat photo should be.

It's just being displayed wrong.

Re:Streched Images? (1)

thecaramelsensation (895142) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913028)

Satellite view on the other hand uses whatever perspective afforded by the position of the satellite. It isn't always directly overhead, you know.

I know the position of my satellite. And for the record, I was directly overhead of your mom. Sucka.

This is gonna be interesting. (1)

franktinsley (865199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912893)

Once they add map data for the rest of the entire earth it'll be fun asking it for directions from say, Portland, OR to Tokyo. I wonder if they'll make deals with airlines and it'll just have you book a trip.

Google Map: Getting better and better (1)

helioquake (841463) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912901)

...and now I can see my dad's truck in Japan.

Been looking... (1, Troll)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912902)

Tried looking around Iraq for WMD's; this is what Google tells me:

We could not understand the location "weapons of mass destruction" near Iraq

funny because it understands Cocksuckers near NYC [mintruth.com] just fine... but I understand because "Canada" puts you in England (Hampshire) [google.co.uk] .

found WMD here (2, Interesting)

kf6auf (719514) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913041)

If you search for weapons of mass destruction they're all in one place here [google.com] .

For some reason, if you try zooming in all the way you will notice that they "don't have imagery at this zoom level" which seems convenient to me.

Let's hope that the US government doesn't find out about this information lea^$*H^%&E%(&%L^&P*(^&%^*!

How old are the images? (4, Interesting)

SwellJoe (100612) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912914)

I looked up my office at the corner of 6th and Congress in Austin, Texas and found that the gigantic Frost Bank building (the tallest building in downtown Austin) next door doesn't exist on the map. The Frost building has been there for over a year...So how old is this data?

To quote from the FAQ:

"Satellite images are current, but not real-time."

This seems a bit vague. Does "over a year old" really equal "current"?

I'm not criticizing, just curious. It's wicked cool even if the pictures aren't quite of the present. I just can't check for traffic jams on MoPac yet.

Re:How old are the images? (1)

grendel_x86 (659437) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912955)

Current is relative. Some of the data for Chicago to be 3-4yrs old (Mill Park).

Re:How old are the images? (1)

cmodcmodcmod (689729) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912969)

FWIW: In the Tokyo images, Roppongi Hills [google.com] is still under construction which places the Tokyo (at least for Roppongi) maps at around 3-4 years old.

2 years (1)

kf6auf (719514) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913025)

The images from Pasadena are well over 2 years old. I know because they recently tore up a baseball field and built an underground parking structure (which they just finished) and the construction started about 2 years ago (and finishing got delayed until now), and the picture had the old baseball field there, no construction or anything. Not the most current, but like you said pretty cool nonetheless. -Scott

Paris from above... (1)

geekster (87252) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912920)

If you zoom out a couple of levels from the arc of triumph, Paris starts to look like that city from Star Wars that covers a whole planet, don't you think?

Re:Paris from above... (1)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912985)

You mean Coruscant? [starwars.com] . . .

*resets geeksters geek points to zero*

Re:Paris from above... (1)

geekster (87252) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913036)

Yep, that's the one.

Oh no, my hard earned geek points! Now I'll have to go live with my mother. And she doesn't even have a basement!

But really, you don't know how many times I've regretted that name. But I was young and foolish ;)
And there's no way I'm giving up on my low ID. (Now I'll get 87251 replies telling me to shut up :)

CS? (1)

Nogami_Saeko (466595) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912924)

When looking at Fallujah, "de_dust" was the first thing that came to mind.

Perhaps not all that far off the mark...

N.

Re:CS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912958)

You're funny. Like cancer.

some more interesing objects (5, Informative)

^Z (86325) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912933)

Eiffel Tower [google.com]
St. Peter in Rome [google.com]
Florence, Duomo [google.com]

Water reservoirs in Sahara [google.com] .

Creter of Vesuvius [google.com]

Re:some more interesing objects (1)

nkh (750837) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912961)

Don't forget the university [google.co.uk] who cracked the SHA0 algorithm ;)

Re:some more interesing objects (1)

dapyx (665882) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912986)

Those in Sahara are not water reservoirs, but rather irrigated areas.

Re:some more interesing objects (1)

crimoid (27373) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912987)

Re:some more interesing objects (1)

roseblood (631824) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913029)

That would be smoke, a common by-product of combustion.

Re:some more interesing objects (1)

gklinger (571901) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913046)

Where there's smoke, there's fire. A refinery perhaps?

Re:some more interesing objects (1)

jericho4.0 (565125) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913060)

Those are refineries.

Oil tankers in the Med (1)

leguirerj (442771) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912934)

Gosh, You can actually see oil tankers going thru the Straits of Gibralter. Can't see any aircraft carriers.

strange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912935)

It seems to work one second and then suddently it'll only show grey boxes.

Mt. St. Helens (2, Interesting)

MagikSlinger (259969) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912936)

Nice picture [google.com] . It looks like they used the post eruption photos only.

GPS coordinates (1)

axolotl_farmer (465996) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912938)

I collect insect specimens for my research, and work with international insect collections. Knowning the locality is even more important than knowing the species of the insect.

What if Google added the ability to search for GPS coordinates, or would give you the coordinates for your map.

So what if that spoils your Geocaching!

Re:GPS coordinates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913017)

I think there's a google hack out there that lets you input coordinates and you'll get the google maps result.

What's this in Washington DC that's blacked out? (1)

cryogenix (811497) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912948)

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=38.889295,-77.008 506&spn=0.008626,0.010664&t=k&hl=en [google.co.uk] As far as I know, the whitehouse is over to the left a bit past congress.. So what's in the low res area?

Re:What's this in Washington DC that's blacked out (1)

Aaron England (681534) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913001)

It's capitol hill.

Re:What's this in Washington DC that's blacked out (1)

Fyre2012 (762907) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913002)

good question...

map says "United States Capitol", but i'm Canadian, is that where congress does their business?

Also, the white house and the 2 large buildings on either side of it arn't just blurred, they're completely solid brown on the roof...
What's the deal?

oh, and the clincher...

The upside down pentagram featuring 3 parks/monuments, the white house and Mt Vernon Square...

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=38.902631,-77.03609 0&spn=0.027938,0.042658&t=k&hl=en [google.com]

Re:What's this in Washington DC that's blacked out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913033)

Click the "Map" link in the upper right, and you'll see it's "United States Capitol".

Heh. Type in "RIAA" and you'll see them on the map, too.

Iranian nuclear plant? (1)

rxmd (205533) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912952)

This is the airstrip at Bushehr, Iran [google.com] . Interesting how Bushehr is available at high resolution while Tehran isn't. First to find the neighboring nuclear plant construction site wins a cookie!

Jesus H... (1, Interesting)

rokzy (687636) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912968)

are we going to have a new story every time Google adds a little bit more info to its crappy maps?

yes, they *are* crappy, for the UK at least.

at first all they did was sloppily overlay road maps onto postcode maps, with the result that postcodes are displaced from their true location by about 2 streets (a lot since a postcode is supposed to localise you to within half a street or so).

now they've added spotty low-res imagery on top. looking at where I live the map looks quite wrong, but then it's so low-res I can't even resolve streets so I can't say for sure.

this is very very poor. I expect more from Google, even at beta.

whats up with the white house and its erased roof (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912979)

whats up with the white house and its erased roof tops? http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=32.765737,-117.2267 60&spn=0.008326,0.013561&t=k&hl=en [google.com]

Re:whats up with the white house and its erased ro (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913056)

That's probably just to obscure the fact that they likely still haven't placed anti-aircraft missile batteries up there, like everyone assumes they have since 9/11.

You can still look at fairly high resolution pics of the roof of the White House from older 1988 USGS aerial photo data [microsoft.com] . Same thing with the blurred-out capitol buildings. Interestingly, the roof of the Pentagon is there in all its glory, albeit they obviously pasted in a DoD-reviewed patch of footage (it's pretty easy to see the seams).

If you like this... (1)

shadowmatter (734276) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912982)

I'd recommend World Wind [nasa.gov] to complement it. Although perhaps not as slick because it's not built on Javascript (although I was intruiged, however, to learn it works on managed DirectX), I just searched for about a half-dozen places near where I live, and where my girlfriend visited in Japan, and I think World Wind gives higher resolution (plus, some of the Google images look somewhat skewed). Not an exhaustive comparison by any means, and YMMV :) Nonetheless, a move in the right direction, so chalk one up for Google. (Interestingly, I noticed that on the Google Jobs page, they have what looks like a screen shot [google.com] of World Wind on some computer. Perhaps the guy in the picture is saying "One day, we'd like to make something like this program," or "One day, we'd like to conquer this planet here." ;)

- shadowmatter

The area I grew up in (1)

jd (1658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12912992)

Is still horribly low resolution, although the town next to it is shown in moderate detail.


Edge of Stockport, England [google.com]


For those with an interest in murder mysteries, a certain lady by the name of Agatha Christie was apparently a frequent visitor to the town of Marple - she was apparently on excellent terms with one of the aristocracy who lived there.

Sydney Harbour censored! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12912993)

They've made Sydney CBD and Harbour low resolution. This means that you can't see decent pictures of the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the Opera House, or anywhere in the harbour.

Just search for "Sydney" and zoom in a little, you'll see the problem.

I bet this is part of our NSW government's plan to overcome terrorists... [smh.com.au]

Ancient Monuments (1)

fyoder (857358) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913006)

This is great, but I still wish they'd increase the zoom level overall. Britain is literally covered in interesting stuff, much more interesting than Buckingham Palace. The standing stones at Stonehenge and Callanish on the Isle of Lewis come immediately to mind, but can't zoom in close enough to see them.

If the google guys are reading this, please consider putting sites of archaeological interest high on the 'to do' list.

Site of the 2020 Olympics (1)

SynapseLapse (644398) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913009)

The 2020 Olympics [google.com] will be held here. ^_^

No Pools In fallujah! (3, Funny)

loudgazelle (861612) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913012)

I didn't see a single backyard pool in that map of Fallujah. NO WONDER THEY'RE SO GODDAMN MAD.

Re:No Pools In fallujah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913067)

Google isn't accurate enough to show all those pools of blood.

Alphabet Soup! The NSA..... (1)

thecaramelsensation (895142) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913015)

...and the DIA are probably all up in arms about this.
This negates the purpose of that Geospatial Angency of America's, does it not? I mean, I'd love to think that we can view all of the world unimpeded but that is not realistic, /.'ers.

No doubt if you zero in on "locations" such as EurAsia or CT or VA or MD ;) - it is undoubtedly censored.
I would not put that past the NSA.
Why, you say?

"Why would The Caramel Sensation suggest such a thing?"
The decade was young, and the mid-90's were the technical revolution. And along came Windows 95 and NT 4.0 releases with the infamous "NSA_KEY"....

Weird error (1)

Fjan11 (649654) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913018)

If you look at the Netherlands and zoom in, at some point the the country name is changed to Belgium. Zoom in further and it's back to normal.

Patchiness (1)

Daniel Rutter (126873) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913019)

The Sydney Harbour Bridge! [google.co.uk]

Hmm. Maybe not so much.

For most of Sydney's suburbs, though, they've got amazing resolution. I mean, if you want to see Gladesville Shopping Centre [google.co.uk] in awesome detail - no problem!

I presume more inner-Sydney detail's coming soon. There's plenty of detail on our huge stupid Parliament House [google.co.uk] already.

Re:Patchiness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913031)

I presume more inner-Sydney detail's coming soon.

No way. They've got the photos of one of the prettiest harbours in the world (who hasn't?!), I reckon they're not showing them for either commercial or security reasons.

Call me paranoid if you will... call me when they post the photos.

Cheney's undisclosed location revealed! (1, Funny)

October_30th (531777) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913032)

Oh no! The secret's [google.com] out!

(WTF?)

But.... (1)

rudydog (890388) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913042)

Its still not as good as keyhole. Google is going to make us pay for the real good stuff.

flags (1)

shird (566377) | more than 9 years ago | (#12913045)

Itd be great to be able to place your own flags like in keyhole, so you can label a spot and pass the link to friends. (you can however doubleclick a spot and press 'link to this page' to get a link which always centers on that spot).

Here, someone has had a go at Bob the Builder, and you can see his body:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=brisbane+australia&l l=-27.967898,153.416884&spn=0.008175,0.010461&t=k& hl=en [google.com]

Google makes the world smaller (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12913058)

Google proves that the other side of the world is in deed not that much different than our side.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?