Making your own DeLorme maps with XMap

4.3k · July 12, 2009

(This one is another public answer to something someone brought up to me in PM)

Every now and then someone comments/complains that DeLorme doesn't offer packaged maps for outside of North America. And a few folks can be counted on to reply that you can make your own maps with XMap -- implying this is somehow just as good for "the average user."

It isn't.

XMap is a great product for the GIS professional and maybe someone with a strong interest in making their own maps. But the average user (whoever that may be) is not going to have easy access to millions of miles of road data and millions of POI's to build a map set comparable to Garmin's MapSource ($100-$150 depending on version) or DeLorme's Topo 8 USA ($100 if bought separately from the PN-40). And the "average user" (whoever that may be) isn't likely to have the background in GIS or be willing to take the time to put it all together.

That's why I said elsewhere that having XMap is not comparable to having packaged maps for areas outside of North America - it's not meant to be.

---

That's just my opinion though. Does anyone want to counter? I'd be especially interested in hearing from folks who have made hiking or travel maps using XMap...

Edited July 12, 2009 by lee_rimar

8.9k · July 13, 2009

What I'm reading here is that an experienced GIS (whatever that is lol) pro could make maps and then offer them for use much like the free maps on FileDepot? Seems like this could be a bonus in the future should some experienced and talented souls decide to take this on?

Am I reading this correct?

4.3k · July 13, 2009

Roddy, the XMap license agreement would not allow someone to offer maps like the open source stuff on gpsfiledepot.

Edit to add: I looked up the license. Skip down to post #8 in this thread.

Edited July 13, 2009 by lee_rimar

5.3k · July 13, 2009

I think you've got it about right, Lee. I have used XMap some, and find it great for making maps with a relatively specific (i.e., narrow) geographic focus. It just gets to be too much work to develop wide coverage. While theoretically possible to work for some of the applications mentioned elsewhere, I think it impractical.

4.3k · July 13, 2009

Original content withdrawn. Skip down to post #8...

Edited July 14, 2009 by lee_rimar

8.9k · July 13, 2009

I have used XMap some, and find it great for making maps with a relatively specific (i.e., narrow) geographic focus....
Thanks.

Would you know the license restrictions on redistribution (or can you point me to a source)?

I've read that the single-user version (what PN-40 users can get for $100 or so) wouldn't let you redistribute versions to load onto a GPS other than your own; that you only get re-distibution rights with a much more expensive Enterprise license.

http://forums.delorme.com/viewtopic.php?t=18834

That would kinda shoot down any hopes of a cooperative project for an open-source map library on the DeLorme.

Yep, never thought about the licensing side....

2.6k · July 13, 2009

I have used XMap some, and find it great for making maps with a relatively specific (i.e., narrow) geographic focus....
Thanks.

Would you know the license restrictions on redistribution (or can you point me to a source)?

The single-user version (what PN-40 users can get for $100 or so) wouldn't let you redistribute versions to load onto a GPS other than your own; that you only get re-distibution rights with a much more expensive Enterprise license.

http://forums.delorme.com/viewtopic.php?p=118609#118609

That would kinda shoot down any hopes of a cooperative project for an open-source map library for DeLorme units.

The example you linked to involved using DeLorme data (that's why the TOPO quads didn't show when loaded to the datacard). DeLorme has no rights as a tool maker to restrict what you do with your own data. Get the version of xMap Professional without data and you have the right to do do as you wish with your maps. You can not distribute xMap itself, that is all DeLorme has the rights to control. Edited July 13, 2009 by coggins

4.3k · July 13, 2009

Get the version of xMap Professional without data and you have the right to do as you wish with your maps

Not according to their license agreement and product feature chart. XMap's license agreement spells out how you may distribute your work and it's fairly restrictive. The license agreement and feature comparison chart both say that to exchange maps with multiple GPS units, you need XMap Enterprise edition. No distinction made regarding source of map data, the license simply covers output of "the system."

See also

So, apart from have a "right" to do -- have you actually used XMap in any flavor? You mentioned the feature comparison on DeLorme's site is outdated (and I notice it still refers only to the PN-20). Do you know if the ability to compile maps for multiple GPS units really does exist in the other XMap versions?

Edited July 14, 2009 by lee_rimar

2.6k · July 15, 2009

Lee, it' not clear if you're being purposely obtuse, or whether you just don't know. Giving you the benefit of doubt, let's clear up a couple of things. I'm a little disappointed with your responses. As a "Computer Consultant", I would think you would have a better understanding of intellectual properties. I'm not indignant with DeLorme's licensing document, I understand what it says and have been a copyright holder and intellectual property owner for over 30 years. Quite frankly, I never said they didn't have the right to say something (freedom of speech is a basic human rights law), only that they didn't say it. Their policy covers their "system", my data isn't a part of their system. Your response has only been repeatably that you are not a lawyer. Who asked? As you brought up licensing, why would you resort to "sidestepping or ignoring" the issue and make an accusation that I do this? I have never posted about hacked iphones or Groundspeak's API so don't associate me with those that do. I never wrote that xMap Professional can distribute data to anyone, but that your linked example was feature outdated and gave an example. With 10's of thousands of hours using GIS software including xMap, I have a pretty good understanding of the workflow. I've found the ESRI plugin to be more suited to our use. It's not the output from xMap that would be opensourced, but the data that is inputted. xMap 6.2 has the ability to import vector shapefiles and geo-referenced raster data. Millions of miles of road data and millions of POI information are available, but apparently this isn't common knowledge to DeLorme consumer product users. Look son, if you want the opensource data on your PN-40, you can use any version of xMap. If you want to make it available to someone else, maybe they also should spring for a version of xMap. You can ask to be called "Lorretta" all you want, but you're going to have to throw down to get into the game. You really shouldn't expect someone to pay for xMap GIS Enterprise, do all the work, and then provide hand outs to the general public. I'm sorry if you feel my replies didn't address your issues, I'm not a teacher (not that you asked), but I'm done with this thread. In closing, I'll leave you the following:

001001100010001101111000001100100011001000111011
001001100010001101111000001101010011010000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011100000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100011000111011
001001100010001101111000001101110011001100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011010100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101010011011100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011100000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100011000111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101000011001100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011000100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100010100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100100001100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101000011010000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100011000111011
001001100010001101111000001100110100001000111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101010011010000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011100000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100011000111011
001001100010001101111000001101110011001100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011010100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101010011011100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011100000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100011000111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101000011001100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011000100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100100010100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011011100111011
001001100010001101111000001101110011010000111011
001001100010001101111000001100100100001100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011000000111011
001001100010001101111000001101010011010000111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011010100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011000100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011001100111011
001001100010001101111000001101100011100000111011
001001100010001101111000001100100100010100111011
001001100010001101111000001100100011001000111011

Edited July 16, 2009 by coggins

9.5k · July 15, 2009

Something isn't right . From this translator translates to the following text:

"Those Who Can, Do; Those Who Can't, Teach."

Now having said that, having been in the business of storing and archiving the materials involved in intellectual output from intellectually protected property, the laws are ambiguous enough that creates the court contained fights in the first place.

There are fair use guidelines versus usage for commercial purposes regulations and I believe (and I can be very easily mistaken) this is where the entire debate may rest.

Edited to add that was wiered, it took a binary to text translation throw the text in code quote for it to come out in text. I have some words about people who make that kind of backhanded statement on the way out of a debate. But I'll keep them to myself.

Edited July 15, 2009 by TotemLake

4.3k · July 15, 2009

...not clear if you're being purposely obtuse, or whether you just don't know...

Coggins, I'm completely befuddled by your reply.

Let me try to make it a simple yes/no question: Can current non-enterprise versions of xMap create map files which can be loaded on multiple PN-series GPS units -- without the users of those GPS units also having a copy of xMap on their systems (that is, most "regular" PN-series users with Topo 7 or 8)?

To sharpen the point, is that capability in the software or not? I'll ask not only Coggins, but anyone else here that has used the product and tried this.

Edited July 16, 2009 by lee_rimar

8.9k · July 15, 2009

...it' not clear if you're being purposely obtuse, or whether you just don't know...
Coggin, I'm completely befuddled by your reply.

Let me try to make it a simple yes/no question: Can current non-enterprise versions of xMap create map files which can be loaded on multiple PN-series GPS units -- without the users of those GPS units also having a copy of xMap on their systems (that is, most "regular" PN-series users with Topo 7 or 8)?

To sharpen the point, is that capability in the software or not?

To carry this thought further, what if both users have XMAP?

July 16, 2009

I'll weigh in on this, although admittedly IANAL:

If the license says you can't share tool output regardless of input data, then you can't share tool output. End of story.

Whether or not that license clause is actually legal and will stand up in court is a whole different story. But the truth is that for most people, winding up in court to fight such a thing is bad enough that whether the clause in the license is actually legal or not, the fact that it's there means you had better respect it unless you want to get stomped on in the courts. That's the sad truth of our legal system - in general, he who has the most money wins.

As to whether that license clause is morally right - I definately think it is "wrong" - tool output should be under the same license as the input + whatever restrictions the tool user (e.g. the person actually doing the work) might want to add, assuming the tool data input license allows such restrictions.

An example of another industry - 2-3 Wii games were pulled from the market recently because a foreign subcontractor (Indian or Pakistani I think? I can't remember.) used ScummVM (an open source engine) to develop them. The primary vendor (Based in Germany IIRC) that subcontracted the games out wanted to meet the terms of the open source license once they were made aware of the issue, BUT the license terms of Nintendo's SDK expressly forbid development of open source software with the toolset.

July 16, 2009

Let me try to make it a simple yes/no question: Can current non-enterprise versions of xMap create map files which can be loaded on multiple PN-series GPS units -- without the users of those GPS units also having a copy of xMap on their systems (that is, most "regular" PN-series users with Topo 7 or 8)?

Lee, I'll try to answer this simply, but it's not a simple answer...

The Pro and Editor versions of Xmap will allow you to transfer and view map packages on multiple PN-series devices provided that those devices were registered in the software before said map package was created. Eg: you buy 3 PN's and Xmap Pro, you have the 3 PN's registered in the software, you create a map package. That map package will be viewable by all 3 of those PN's. It will not be viewable by a 4th PN that wasn't registered in the software before the map package was created.

The Enterprise version of Xmap creates a "skeleton key" when a map package is created that allows it to be viewed on any PN-series unit, regardless of it's relationship to the software.

I hope that this helps!

-Brian

4.3k · July 16, 2009

Brian: That helps a lot, thanks.

Just to be sure I understand it: The requirement to register each specific PN-device within the Pro or Editor system on my machine doesn't change if I'm creating maps of entirely my own data, as opposed to something that also contains DeLorme data?

This started off as such a simple question before it forked into separate discussions of what the software is capable of vs what the license allows

-Lee

Edited July 16, 2009 by lee_rimar

2.1k · July 16, 2009

Brian: That helps a lot, thanks.

......

-Lee

Yes, certainly a lot more helpful that Post #13.

4.3k · July 16, 2009

...Post #13.

Oh good, it wasn't just me scratching my head over that one

Edited July 16, 2009 by lee_rimar

July 16, 2009

Brian: That helps a lot, thanks.

Just to be sure I understand it: The requirement to register each specific PN-device within the Pro or Editor system on my machine doesn't change if I'm creating maps of entirely my own data, as opposed to something that also contains DeLorme data?

You've got it, Lee. It's the cutting of the map packages, regardless of what the data is, that ties the map package to the PN-series GPS unit.

Glad I could help.

-Brian

8.9k · July 16, 2009

Brian: That helps a lot, thanks.

Just to be sure I understand it: The requirement to register each specific PN-device within the Pro or Editor system on my machine doesn't change if I'm creating maps of entirely my own data, as opposed to something that also contains DeLorme data?

You've got it, Lee. It's the cutting of the map packages, regardless of what the data is, that ties the map package to the PN-series GPS unit.

Glad I could help.

-Brian

Am I reading you to say that the registration is for each different map made? If Lee were to have the software and make me a map, the next map Lee makes could be registered for someone else's unit?

Forgive me if this is a dumb question....

4.3k · July 16, 2009

... the registration is for each different map made? If Lee were to have the software and make me a map, the next map Lee makes could be registered for someone else's unit?

Good question.

What I'm understanding from Brian (and what I gathered from other conversations on the subject) is that to give you (or anyone) a copy of any map I've made, I need to plug your GPS into my computer and re-cut the map specifically for your device. No limit on how many different devices I can build maps for, as long as I can physically connect each target device to my computer before I cut the map.

So... to build a "public library" of open source maps for PN-devices (as alluded to in posts 2, 3, and 16), all you could effectively do is share some of the raw source data, and maybe instructions on how to pull it in to XMap and cut a map from it. And only folks who owned their own licensed copy of XMap would be able to take advantage of this.

This would be allowed within the license for XMap as long as you were not selling the maps. The way I read the license, you can give your work away. But if you sell a map built with xMap, you're infringing on DeLorme's rights, even if you're not using their map data. I suppose the argument could be made that even if you own all of the map data, DeLorme owns the data structures created by XMap.

But based on the earlier comments in this thread, I'm sure lots of folks (or at least one) would argue about that intepretation.

Edited July 16, 2009 by lee_rimar

2.1k · July 16, 2009

No limit on how many different devices I can build maps for, as long as I can physically connect each target device to my computer before I cut the map.

FWIW, this is my experience on Topo 8, not XMap.

I was helping a local cacher with her PN-40 (purchased after she saw mine work ) get maps loaded on to it.

In the course of events, I connected my PN-40 to her PC to check something.

The other night, out on a cache run, we tested that by switching SD cards.

All maps/imagery on her SD card could be read in my PN-40 as I had connected to her PC prior to cutting.

Conversely, her PN-40 could not read any of the cut maps/images on my SD card.

4.3k · July 17, 2009

That's interesting (and good) to know T8 will register maps for every PN-device that's ever been connected/registered to your computer, rather than having to re-cut for each device individually. I didn't realize from earlier discussion that multiple device keys could be imbedded in a cut map file.

It's still not clear to me if an XMap developer would be able to produce a file that could be used to cut a map from T8, or if the person cutting the map would also have to be using XMap.

If Brian or anyone else from Team DeLorme is still reading ... any thoughts?

5.3k · July 18, 2009

I'm not sure I'm following you, Lee, but I'll take a stab. XMap is capable of using Topo8 data to cut detail maps, but AFAIK Topo8 cannot use XMap data (precut or postcut). But you do have me wondering if Topo8 could get something out of an XMap project file (reality check: two different formats...it looks like one would need to export/import a gpx file).

4.3k · July 18, 2009

...XMap is capable of using Topo8 data to cut detail maps, but AFAIK Topo8 cannot use XMap data (precut or postcut)

Exactly what I was asking, thanks.

I'm sure you could share some data between the XMap and Topo programs using GPX files, even if not complete maps.

Edited July 18, 2009 by lee_rimar

4.3k · July 29, 2009

On more data point, just in case there's still any life in this subject :lol:

A couple of folks over on the DeLorme forum tell me XMap can't make a routable, searchable road map unless you buy DeLorme's data -- and international data isn't available yet*. So at best you'd be able to make raster maps, like the downloadable 24K topos. Source: http://forums.delorme.com/viewtopic.php?t=19955

---

* DeLorme's international base map is not available for sale yet, and you can't get a price on their website. If interested, inquire directly to their business sales staff.

http://www.delorme.com/DigitalMapData/world.htm

Edited July 29, 2009 by lee_rimar

Making your own DeLorme maps with XMap

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation