anyone else tried it yet? i know the maps aren't anywhere near current. typical for windows though.http://www.live.com
12/24/2006 3:30:29 PM
I've seen a few areas that are more clear with Windows Live than with Google Earth, but not many.
12/24/2006 3:40:30 PM
i saw a suv outfitted with a dozen cameras or so on thanksgiving day on the inner beltline 440 and had the live.com logo on it
12/24/2006 6:59:39 PM
^^^ doesn't know what he's talking about
12/24/2006 8:11:47 PM
the birds-eye view feature is mildly innovative
12/24/2006 9:22:22 PM
^^oh no?compare the differences and tell me i'm wrong again.google mapshttp://tinyurl.com/ynf4yowindows live mapshttp://tinyurl.com/yavwce
12/24/2006 10:12:14 PM
used this at an old jerb. it uses the same satellite imagery for both sites. the street mapping is more current with google for the most part though
12/24/2006 10:17:18 PM
^^ uh, well for one, live.com has been out (in a few forms) for about a year. many of us have been following its progress in message_topic.aspx?topic=391379. second, many reviews actually rate windows live map search as better than or at least equal to many of the other players in the maps space (yahoo, google, ask). they've done a lot over the last 6 months and have some of the most updated data out there (especially aerial imagery). third, your statement "typical for windows" means nothing. despite the name windows live, live.com has very little to do with Windows or its historical problems. but glad you're contributing to the discussion.[Edited on December 24, 2006 at 11:57 PM. Reason : for seriously k]
12/24/2006 11:57:23 PM
12/25/2006 3:14:41 PM