I’m sure if you’ve used Google’s Street view, you will have noticed that the images are mostly in larger metro areas. If you zoom out from those areas, you can see that the image data in confined to neat “squares” around those metro areas.

I though this was an off way to organize this information. I mean it’s quite obvious that Google cannot photograph EVERY street in the world right away, and it makes sense to start with highly populated areas first. However the notion of squaring off these ares seems to be sort of counter intuitive. Because as I will show, the is most likely data being collected by Street View cars that is not being shown.

Just some FYI, Google uses cars with cameras that take a series of photographs, and then those photographs are stitched together to form the pan-able view you have in Street View. Rather and taking a view of the vehicle in motion, Google Cars take one of these omnidirectional images every so many feet.

(Google seems to be in a hurry to finnish this project )

I’m sure that there is some short of cohesive master plan for the paths of these cars. But in the end all the drives really have to do is to wonder down every road in America, and looking at the street view maps, it really does seem like “wonder” is the appropriate word.

Have a look at the Knoxville, TN Street View availably.

Here the South-East and North-West corners of this square are sparse. This is because there are few if any roads in those areas. If we have a closure look at the North-West corner, we can see where the Google Car went down some side roads, but in down so seemed to cross the invisible line that marks the top of this square.

Here is the live data view from Google

It’s pretty obvious that the Google Car Followed Stoney Fork Rd through Sheam, then made a right onto Clinchmore Rd before stopping. What’s odd about this is that all the data from north of this inviable line is not on Google Street View.

This posses a couple of questions. Do the cars stop collecting data when they pass outside of the defined box? This is unlikely, because in the is example, if Google expanded the Square, then the cars would has to retrace this part of the road. So in all probability, Google Cars are collecting the data, but it is not being displayed. Why Not? It understandable that it takes time to Process a Street View section of Map. The Car Camera images have to be stitched together, the routines setup in Google Maps, etc. But this just begs the question, did Google just not process the data north of this line? This also seems unlikely, given that again in the case the car drove south of the line at two points. So why skip over data to process if it was coming off the car in a linear fashion.

In all likely hood there is probably some sophisticated geo-taging going on with each set of images these cars take. I would not be surprised if the omnidirectional images are not assembled on-the-fly by computers in each Car as they are taken, the the geo-taged with high resolution GPS. These data blobs can be dumped like a hand full of marble into the Street View databse. Software at Googles end can then assemble the “chains” and “connection points” each of these blobs have with other blobs based on the geo-data. I’ve not done the research to see just how google is doing this, but this seems the logical away to put it together.

That just leave the question of the inviable line. If it’s likely that Google Cars took the pictures, and those pictures have been processed, then why is the data not up? Google seems to be cutting it off at an arbitrary point. Also, why use Squares? Circles seem to be easier to do than squares. If Google really is artificially suppressing some of the street view data, why not do it using a Circle vector. With a square you have to define four points (or four lines), basically 8 units of data. A Circle is can be defined by a single point and a distance factor, 3 units of data. As you are ready to replace more street view data, Google simple ups the distance factor to include more space.

Finally, the most convincing part of the artificially suppressing argument, is the lack of Interstate views. It’s unlilky that Google Cars are based in every metro area in the us. They seem to drive around. So, do they have the cameras turned off while on the Interstates?

If you look at the separation of the squares between Dalton Ga, and Adairsville, GA, which is only about 8 miles, you can’t tell me that bit of I75 has not been photographed or processed.

It’s also clear that GA136 was traveled by a Google Car because there’s yet another orphaned bit of road. Why is GA136 between Vihanow and Sugar Valley not on Street View?

Perhaps Google has a reason for doing this, I’m just cannot seem to understand why.

Having had near total vertical communications integration for 3 years, getting used to not having it is hard. There simply is NO realistic alternative to Exchange and that makes the need for me to break from it all the more necessary and difficult.

For the past three weeks I’ve been using Google Apps to run Email and Scheduling on TCG. I have to admit, Google’s Web App concept really lives up to the hype. For Email and Calendar I can use my Mac and be just as happy as I want to be.

The one truly colossal failing to that there is no good way to synchronize Apple’s Address Book with Gmail Contacts. In fact it’s almost impossible to sync Gmail contacts with ANY thing. There is a klugy way of hacking iTunes to allow an iPod to sync with Google Contacts, but that date is VERY minimal, and does not include contact photos. Google DOES provide an API for contact access, but despite a flurry of rumors, Google has not opened up Gmail Contacts to SyncML clients. There is a third party service called Goosync that is supposed to do this. But Google should not have to rely on hacked third party applications to do something that is a valid web standard.

I would have thought someone would have built a module into Apples Sync Services Framework or iSync.

But aside from the Mac’s inability to sync with Gmail Contacts, there is another issue, mobility. With Exchange, I have Outlook in the Palm of my hand via my Windows Mobile Phone. At his time I am unable to conveniently make Google Apps work with my phone. I have the mail application going out an checking my IMAP account every five minutes. But Calendar and Contact integration are not there. This is practically sad, because with Exchange, I could enter contact data on my desktop, and by the time I got out to my car, I could use Voice Command on my phone with my bluetooth headset to dial the number. My phone never even had to leave my pocket. Exchange and Activesync worked that quick.

Now Exchange was no bed of roses. The Outlook Web Access interface was unrefined to the point of being unusable. So if I did not have my desktop, laptop, or phone, I was out of luck. Exchange also necessitated me having a Windows Server, not entirely a bad thing, but costly.

Back to the mobile front, I’m hopping that Google’s release of Android will step up and provide total online and offline integration with Google Apps.

At the moment my HTC Dash is dyeing. I hope to limp it along for the next 30 days till we get a good look Android.

After I finished my Whine about syncing contacts between Gmail and *anything*, I got to thinking about contacts and pim data in general.

Realistically there only needs to be 1 address book/contact system on a computer. Think of it as a central repository of data. The notion that Quickbooks and other software packages have about “syncing” your contact data across programs on the same machine is completely insane when you think about. Why not just use the same data base for all contact data?

There have been quite a few times I have sent invoices to a wrong address because I updated my clients new address in Outlook, but forgot to update it in Quickbooks.

In order to have a truly centralized contact database, it would have to be flexible. There are certain elements of contact data that is universal, Name, addresses, phones, etc. However there is also a need for programs to have additional and specific data for each client. For example, while a Mail Program and Quickbooks both might need Name and Email Address, Quickbooks might also have the need to store contact specific data such as payment terms or credit card information for which an Email program would have no use.

In this case the central contact database could be a flexible framework to allow extra “fields” to be added to each record. Programs like Email would just ignore data is does not need. If the software maker is particularly security minded, they could maintain there own database of sensitive information, but only use hooks and associations to link central contact data back to the program. Or even easier, just encrypt the data in the program specific fields. This would allow a much easier backup model.

In cases were removal of a contact by one program might “break” another. The software marker could keep a realtime backup of the data within it’s own data framework for restoration, or flags could be set for each contact set to warn the user that they should not completely delete a contact because some other software requires the data. The central contact database could also have a management program (Like Address Book), that would allow the user to set visibility for a contact to a particular software package.

Finally, all of this data should have some structure to synchronize with a server ether in the office or in the cloud. This would allow mobile applications to use and change the data. I have a larger concept of a synchronization framework, but I’m still forming the ideal.

To it’s credit, I think Apple is trying to open up it’s contact database more so that third party software can use the data.

Endicia is a postage printing system for the Mac.

<disclaimer and rant>I have a very low opinion of the United States Postal Service. Most of this stems from my interactions with the local post office personnel. I will not allow my venomous loathing of the American Postal Workers Union and the apathetic laziness it cultivates to negatively impact my review. </disclaimer and rant>

I do a lot of mailing and for the most part the less I interact with postal workers the better. While I have found a few postal employees that have been really helpful, far to often I have encountered people who seem to actively try to thwart my attempts to use the service.

For many years I printed out labels from my printer and spent a few hours affixing labels and stamps to #10 envelopes. At the end of 500 mail peaces, I was lucky to get the label on right side up, much less straight. At some point we managed to get a printer that would print directly on to envelopes, but ever after that, we had to spend time putting stamps on.

A few years ago, I discovered the on-line postage printing system, Stamps.com. This system allows a person to print postage with just a computer, Printer, and #10 envelopes. SWEET! So my work load was cut down dramatically and I’ve been using Stamps.com happily for the most part sense shortly after they started.

However, I have always been miffed that Stamps.com did not have a Mac client, and truth be told the windows version was slow and kinda buggy, but it was better than lick’n & stick’n, so I suffered on.

With my Desktop Mac Change over, I have found a need for Postage on my Mac. For the first couple of runs, I used Stamps.com in Parallels, but this sort of defeats the purpose of trying to convert to Mac. After posting some of my thoughts on my transition, a person wrote in to tell me that there was indeed a postage system for Mac, called Endicia.

At first glance, Endicia for Mac is pretty much like Stamps.com for Windows. It costs $15 per month, plus postage, and has similar features to Stamps.com. Oddly, Endicia does have a windows client, but the monthly cost is much lower than Stamps.com (because it lacks some features most people will never use), but the Mac client was the full $15.

I of course had to sign up before I could download the software. The service does have a free month to try, but you have to give up payment information right off the bat to get a look at the software. Fantastically, there was a screencast of the Mac software I could watch, so while I could not use the software with out singing up for the service. This answered many of my off the cuff questions.

There was a bit of trouble signing up. I went through the online process of registering, and got an email back with my combination, but I could not log in to get the software. I gave it 24 hours, but I could never get in. Now while this was a bit deflating, it did give me a opportunity to “test drive” their technical support. My first few calls to the tech support number, 800-576-3279, netted me only a voice mail box for tech support. I did leave a message, and sure enough, a few minutes later Mike called my back. After about 90 seconds on the the phone with this guy I was logged in and downloading software.

What was THIS tech support call that sold me on the company. When I first called and got the voice mail box for tech support, I though they were busy, but playing with the phone tree I soon realized that the company seems quite small. While taking to the support rep, I could here other people talking. What struck me at first was that EVERYONE seemed to be speaking American English with west coast ascents, this seemed to jive with my impression that it was a small well run company doing its own in house support. The people I spoke where not generic paid support people reading from a script, they seemed to me to be real people who cared about the company they worked for. Also there was none of the artificial “have I helped you with all your issues today Mr. Tabor?” BS that I get when I talk to Mumbai. It was refreshing.

As far as the software itself, it’s pretty straight forward. It installs like most other Mac Applications.

Of course I did not have any postage so I had to add $10. I had to provide my Credit Card when I signed up, so it did not ask for it again, nice touch.

Setting up my custom Mailing Graphic and Fonts was easy. Setting up the printer was a bit more diffacult. This is where I figured out that the Macintosh OS 10.5 Driver for my HP 7410 All-in-one does not recognize the second paper tray. I found a couple of forums talking about it and it turns out to be a driver bug from HP, not related to Endicia. About the only thing I had trouble finding was the option to do a sample print of postage just to see if I got the setting right. In Stamps.com you have to do a big walk through to make sure you have the envelopes pointed the right way, and you wind up burning two envelopes in the process. Annoying if you have to do a reinstall of the printer, but helpful burning a first setup. The second burned envelope in this possess is an full sample showing you exactly what the finished product will look like. Stamps.com also has a quick “sample” button to see the effects changes you make to the return address’s font or size will have on how the envelope looks.

I spent several minutes looking for a “sample” button in Endica, but could not find one. The printer setup process does not send anything to the printer, which is in contrast, to Stamps.com. Ironically, the setup process does have a print dialog window, complete with a “print” button, but a dialog warns you that clicking “Print” will only save your settings and not send something to the printer.

After 20 minutes, I decided I would burn $0.42 cents, just to see the envelope print, and clicked on the “Prepare Envelope for Printing..” button on the main window after filling out all the required stuff.

Much to my surprise, this did not “Print” anything, but did bring up a window showing me the finished product, and here is where I found a “Print a Test Envelope” button.

I’m glad I did this, turns out the my HP Officejet 7410 had some issue printing to the edge of my #10 envelopes. I wound up fixing the issue by manually adjusting envelope size in the Printer Setup in Endicia from 9.5 inches wide, down to 9.15 inches wide. This tricked my printer into printing all the way to the edge of my #10 envelopes, the thus getting all of the bar code.

I’ve only done a couple of mail peace through Endicia. So far I’ve really liked it. the only draw backs I’ve noticed have been things not related to Endicia, such as my Business Addresses being trapped in Quickbooks Premiere 2008 for Windows. Endicia does work with Apple’s address book, and I can do batch printing. I lost my USB scale to a coffee spill some time ago, so I cannot test the interface, but Endicia does came to work with them.

Like Stamps.com Endica does have an option to just print “stamps”, Called “Netstamps” in the Stamps.com world and “InstaPostage” in the Endicia world. I have used Stamps.com photo stamps service in the past (a grade christmas gift for grandparents is a sheet of stamps with their only grand daughter on them ), and Endicia seems to be matching Stamps.com on this as well.

Now only if I could print those “Forever Stamps” with a photo on them.

All in all I have been every pleased with Endicia, and I am looking forward to using it more.