1 line
2.7 KiB
Text
1 line
2.7 KiB
Text
For this submission, I have used the provided Oatka Creek dataset, and have opened it in both QGIS and GRASS GIS, for comparison. In QGIS, I have also created a rudamentary print layout, and have exported it to PDF as well. Both have included a Hillshade, to demonstrate basic capabilities. Overall, I enjoyed working with both of these tools, for different reasons. For QGIS, the tool was pleasantly laid out, and their documentation is very well written, so I never got lost for very long on how to do what I wanted to. GRASS GIS was more built for a programmer/engineer mindset in mind, which I also enjoy. The fact that the GUI is clearly an overlay for the background server, and actively exposes the commands being called on the background server, makes the power user in me very happy, and interested to see how it would act on a headless setup, say in a server farm where screens are not available, but there is a much greater availability of computing horsepower. As a Linux user, and specifically a Debian user at the moment, both packages were readily available in the repositories, and installed in a matter of 2-3 minutes. This is in stark contrast to installing ArcGIS Pro, which has no Linux release to speak of, and required me to build a Windows Virtual Machine exclusively for its use, which was rather frustrating. While some seem to describe both QGIS and GRASS GIS as "rough around the edges", I personally enjoy them, and frankly believe I would have learned more from this course by starting with one or the other. ArcGIS is very good at abstracting the actual underlying task away from the end user, allowing them to play in maps to their hearts content, which can be excellent for new users. Personally, however, I enjoy the task of learning exactly what is happening under the hood, and seeing precisely what makes programs tick, rather than a beautiful GUI that obfuscates what is happening underneath. Additionally, as an Open Source advocate, QGIS and GRASS GIS both appeal to me personally, as they are both GPLv2 licensed, meaning they (and any derivatives) will remain open source for some time to come. QGIS and GRASS GIS are not for the faint of heart, and from hearing complaints in class about so much as installing the program, they don't seem to be very well optimised for Windows in general, but I am incredibly happy that they were both introduced in this course, and even promoted by way of a mandatory assignment. Most fields I have experience with show little advertisement for their open source tools and counterparts, at times even actively discouraging them, so it is heartening to see a class demonstrate and actively advertise (if not necessarily endorse) Open Source alternatives, as well as the "industry standard".
|