YOUNG PROFESSIONAL “
As a user-friendly language with pow- erful and versa- tile data analyses options (hundreds of useful packages are a search query away), R’s poten- tial is hard to over- state.
Second, I hold nothing but praise for ESRI’s field data collection apps. Finally, I acknowledge that some level of fees is necessary to underwrite ESRI’s enterprise-level support and develop- ment. Despite these concessions, how- ever, I echo a long list of academics and industry experts in holding that open source software options like QGIS and R represent the way of the future, for any number of reasons ranging from reproducibility and transparency to cost savings (see Moore and Hutchinson’s 2017 piece, “Why Watershed Analysts Should Use R for Data Processing and Analysis,” in The Confluence for a recent example).
While the perceived inconvenience of coding precludes R for many users, no such barriers exist for QGIS; I am therefore convinced the main reason QGIS hasn’t seen wider adoption is simply inertia. ArcMap pioneered the GIS scene and companies expect profi- ciency in the software, leading schools to (appropriately, given market forces) focus on ArcMap in many geospatial classes. Unsurprisingly, there is a learn- ing curve involved in going from ArcMap to QGIS, although I would venture that QGIS isn’t any less user-friendly than its proprietary cousin: most longtime ArcMap users suffer from an “expert’s blind spot” and forget how daunting its interface can be to the uniniti- ated. However, those able to learn ArcMap have demonstrated that they can learn QGIS (and R, for that mat- ter). Meanwhile, educators interested in introducing students to QGIS – but rightly concerned with meeting market demands for skills in ArcMap – might consider holding class lessons in ArcMap using licensed school computers, while assigning simpler homework projects in QGIS; this would spare students the trouble of licensing their personal laptops, while giving them experience in both platforms.
As with ArcMap, most people will not develop expertise overnight, but basic proficiency can come relatively quickly. While there is some overlap in layout between ArcMap and QGIS, where the two diverge (a frequent occurrence), a simple search engine query on “how to X in QGIS” usually results in a number of helpful articles and posts (more often than not on Stack Overflow). More than once, after I’ve cast aside the bag- gage that I inevitably carry from years of ArcMap usage, I’ve recognized that QGIS’s setup was ultimately the more intuitive. As I continue to use it, QGIS has consistently pleased me with its functionality (especially in concert with GRASS, and I should also mention the plugin Serval for easy raster editing).
Due to its combination of key suites of features and market dominance, ArcMap will rightfully continue to play a crucial role in many organization’s geo- spatial operations. However, for those struggling to pay ArcMap fees, or simply hoping to expand their skillsets and capabilities, some combination of QGIS and R (or other open source platforms) can superpower analyses at little mon- etary expense. Put more simply, I rely on ArcMap and R on my work computer, but favor QGIS and R at home…and these days, I’m finding myself using QGIS more and more even in the former.
“
While the per- ceived inconve- nience of coding precludes R for many users, no such
barriers
exist for QGIS; I am therefore con- vinced the main reason QGIS hasn’t seen wider adoption is simply inertia. ArcMap pioneered the GIS scene and com- panies expect proficiency in the software, leading schools to (appro- priately, given market forces) focus on ArcMap in many geo- spatial classes. Unsurprisingly, there is a learning curve involved in going from ArcMap to QGIS, although I would venture that QGIS isn’t any less user-friendly than its proprie- tary cousin: most longtime ArcMap users suffer from an “expert’s blind spot” and forget how daunting its interface can be to the uninitiated.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
