Google is launching the Google Earth service, where you can (could) get satellite images from all over the planet; but look at this from the FAQ:

Let's see what we can get from that text:

1- PCs and Window are the same; you don't even need to mention the Windows Word.

2- But if by any chance you can't use it, maybe it is because you have some old hardware.

3- And if there is any other option, that would be Macintosh. And they are clear : it won't work.

4- Linux doesn't even exists to be denied.

That would be OK from any Microsoft paper, but it is SO BAD to see that coming from Google.

How many people has google's logo in their sites, from the time when they were nothing, and now we see this happening...

They could:

1- Offer the service on-line, so it won't depend on the OS;

2- Open the code, so people would DO it for them, by free, and it would even work better, even the version for the other system.

Some time ago this kind of thing was just like a marketing war... but now it is close to become discrimination.

A Company can of course choose not to spend money with minorities, but today, in Computerland, they don't necessarily need to, like in this case.

The feel is something like: 'Someone is paying them to DO NOT let me use the service and , what is ten times worse, THEY ARE ACCEPTING!!!'

They think they are winning more, when they close the doors to millions of Linuxers.

And yes, we do are millions, and we should show them what we think about that kind of actitude.

What do you think about it?

Google is just as evil as Microsoft - -they're just not large enough for people to take note of it. Yet.

I think Google is simply allocating its resources to make its Earth project available to the largest user base (ie, Windows users) first. If you are selling something (as Google is) it's only logical to spend the bulk of your budget (time, money, and resources) on the largest audience. To use an analogy - suppose you developed a product that prevented tires from going flat. Would you market your product to bicycle owners first, or unicycle owners first? Granted, it's a pretty bad analogy, but the point is that it makes sense to develop a product that serves 90% of the audience before developing a product that serves single digit percentages of the audience. (Believe me, I wish Linux had a 50%+ market share, but we're just not there yet)

Overall, Google is a for-profit company, and therefore will do whatever is necesary in order to return maximum value to its shareholders. If that means Linux takes a back seat, so be it.

Not that I'm happy about it. But I understand it -- J.W.

Sorry...

1- but that is like to say that if they get my blood also, no problem... they are just working and making money...

2- We can find a lot of problems with google: just look for it in eff.org (Electronic Frontier Foundation)

We have problems with Gmail, orkut, usenet, cookies, " Google's endless data retention policy." and etc.

3- Most of all: whem you say that you are not considering the difference between the regular windows users, like people in offices, millions of them, who barely knows how to send an e-mail, and linux users, some of us btw 'helped' google creating their directories and etc during years.

4- And one more: if you read my post, you will see that I said that if they open the code, they probably would have ot working for linux and for windows, and better.

But you said: "... it's only logical to spend the bulk of your budget (time, money, and resources)..."

Isn't it more logical to have it spending LESS and with better quality?

Well, by myself, I do not send mail to gmail accounts, do not open gmail e-mails, do not accept google cookies and do not use orkut.

Google only means one thing to me - search .

I thought google do use Linux?

http://www.internetweek.com/lead/lead060100.htm

Perhaps they are releasing it to Windows first, and then "considering" a Linux version. Just wish companies that say that would actually get it done.

Obviously it will not be long before the Linux community has developed compatible software... if it does not already exist somewhere. Both the Macintosh and the Linux communities are "easy" because both are fundamentally "Unix."

There do seem to be a lot of services that Google is offering lately which erroneously assume that the target user is running "Internet Explorer as an Administrator on a Windows-XP box." This may be a plausible initial target to shoot for in one's alpha product-rollout, but even Windows users are wising-up very fast. They're turning off Active Scripting, setting up non-administrative accounts for themselves, and using browsers like Firefox. This because they're tired of having their systems hijacked. It is actually harder than ever before to launch a web-site that "every potential customer" can use.

Sundial has a point. I keep saying that Microsoft has a harder time keeping up with the bug fixes than Linux users because:

A: More people are willing to view the code of Linux and fix it.
B: It is much much harder to hack Linux or send a virus do to the vast amounts of variations in the code. Heck, my Linux isn't the same as the original cpy of the one I downloaded.
C: Microsoft is slowly declining in popularity. More people are seeing alternatives to Windows based software.
D: MAC OS is now going to the Intel architecture. It's a happy three ring circus. Cue the elephants!

Supposed computer "geeks" need to get over their "ever big technology company is evil" policy. Sure, Linux is much better, but any computer "geek" who has a computer-related job probably capitalizes from average Joe Windows users not knowing how to use their computers. Microsoft has some pretty bad policies, no doubt, but their popularity alone should not be criticized, it's the ultimate goal of any software company. And now you're cutting into Google, a company I've had very few complaints about. Your criticism of Google Earth's "requirements" is unfounded:

PC's and Windows aren't the same, but "most PC's" and "Windows" are. Whether or not you like it, it's true.

Nothing wrong with this, it's impossible to create a useful 3d program that will work on Pentium Pro's. Again, this is not their fault.

Assumedly, the second most-used PC operating system is Macintosh, and they're clear it won't work because it won't. What's the big deal? Welcome to a little something called most software--this isn't an "evil" Google just cooked up.

Neither does BeOS, Unix, Solaris, PalmOS, or even Microsoft's own Windows CE! If it's not mentioned, we can assume it's not supported.

...

It's called Google Maps. It doesn't have all the features of Google Earth, but it's still very nice and completely Linux-friendly (with Firefox and probably others).

They don't want other people DOING it for them, and remember that this is just a free version of a commercial piece of software. Other posts are correct to remind that Google is a public company that wants to make money.

There are no laws or obligations requiring Google or any company to not discriminate against users of a certain operating system. We Linux users need to accept the fact that our OS is in the minority, and moreover embrace it. The day Linux owns 90% of the market share and Microsoft and everything else is sitting in 10% is probably the day Linux is what Microsoft is now: relatively closed, buggy, attack-prone, and the bane of computer hobbyists everywhere.

You're seriously suggesting Google is being payed or enticed to NOT release Google Earth for Linux? That's just preposterous, and for all you know they eventually will, but it's perfectly natural to release it for Windows first. Haha, perhaps they value us Linux users after all, and are using the huge Windows user base to do free beta testing for the Linux version!

No, but they're surely "winning" more from Windows users than they are from Linux users, it's a simple fact.

I reiterate: while we are perhaps millions, Windows users are millions more. I don't expect special treatment as a Linux user, and neither should you.

In conclusion, the only real possible complaint I can glean from Google Earth is not one you mentioned. I'm referring to previous paying Keyhole users who suddenly find the software they've been paying good money for has been essentially rebranded and released for free. But while I don't know, I would guess that they can simply cancel their subscription and download Google Earth, or perhaps their software has extra features added that's exclusive to their payed version.

Linux users need to stop expecting special treatment for being in the more "elite" computer community. They should stop considering evil toward Linux users as "evil," but evil toward Microsoft and Windows users (such as widespread worms and DoS attacks) as "getting what they deserve". Evil is evil regardless of the victim.

Has anyone even tried google earth? It's the coolest thing since they invented the map. Maybe wine would run it? Can someone port this program to Linux fast?!

Google acquired Keyhole 2 LT in October of 2004 and renamed it to "Google Earth" so it's not like Google is trying to piss on Linux users. They are just working with what they have. Some of you are writing your posts as if Google developed this program themselves and decided not to accomodate Linux users. My impression is more like they just took the code and slapped their label on it. In that regard, yes, they are similar to Microsoft. And yes, it doesn't help that they have all these example graphics on their FAQ depicting the Windows OS.

I'm pretty sure they did some fairly major redesigning, not just relabelling after they acquired Keyhole. And yes, I have tried the program and I agree it's awesome. NASA World Wind is similar, if not better, and open source, you guys should check it out too. It's got many more map sets, including an older 1m black and white satellite photo set and some interesting animations of thing like hurricanes, wildfires, etc. What I can't quite figure out is why Google Earth is 10 meg and World Wind is something like 300 meg, because they both get all content from the net anyway.

From the release notes:

I see that many posters are replying things like:
Whether I can complain or not is a different problem. What the original poster is saying is that google simply IGNORED the sole existence of something different from Windows or Macintosh.

Not that it would not have made me mad either, but they could have said:

What about the good things google has done to promote the open-source community? Has anybody ever heard of "Google Summer of Code"? They are paying students $4500 to write open source software for approved open source organizations. The organizations are acting as mentors for the students and the 200 accepted coders are getting fat paychecks to learn and write open source code for the summer. It's not like they are trying to piss on linux users, it's business. Quit looking for reasons to deprecate companies when you haven't looked into why you should promote them.

Quoted For Truth.

Google is an avid supporter of Open Source. Realize that Google Earth is still in it's early stages, and probably cannot be made open source, in that it is most likely interfacing with proprietary software. It cannot be web-based, as it is too large and relies heavily on graphical rendering capabilities of your video card. The only way to do this would be using Java3D, and there may be a problem with the software interfacing there, or the speed (seeing as it looks like the program was written in C/C++/C#).