Matterport vs. Google Indoor Street View2876
Pages:
1
|
jntooker private msg quote post Address this user | |
| MP and Google indoor streetview are different. but I have come to understand that most customers don't really see a notable difference in the end product. I was hoping to get some opinions here from other MP Pros... - Do you feel MP and Google Indoor Streetview are similar enough technologies to be true competitors? -- If they are, who do you think will come out on top and why? - Predictions on the possibility of these two merging? - Last but not least...3rd party app guys, have you considered making your tech available to Google? If not, why not? |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
jfantin private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hi @jntooker Google Streetview is a very powerful marketing tool for any business that wants to be found and seen on the web, while Matterport is a closed system that delivers high quality images and a wonderful navigation experience with smooth transitions, the dollhouse view, etc. These are two very different value propositions. While you can feed GSV with 360 images generated by MP, the fact is that unless you pay a third party for the job, MP doesn´t make these images available for you to use them in any other platform. For a business to be in Google Streeview it doesn´t need to have a website, which is a good point for small shops, for example. For MP you need a website where to show your model. Google Streetview is free to upload and to maintain, while Matterport requires a payment of $ 19 per model plus a monthly maintenance fee. You cannot use Google Streetview in real estate (it is off limits for now). In my opinion, these are two different animals that share only the fact that both make use of 360 images, but that´s all. Google business is information access and advertisement (they don´t charge you for stitching photos and for linking panoramas,etc). Matterpor business is selling cameras, model processing and hosting. There are plenty of 360 cameras out there, some pretty cheap, and Google is going for volume and not for quality nowadays as it understands that the money is in advertisement and for that to happen they need means to create awareness of the existence of potencial advertisers through inexpensive and massive technologic solutions. That's why Google promotes the use of the Ricoh Theta and such. I don´t think that Google needs Matterport's niche market and technology although it could make good use of some of their engineers if they see any potential in the future. So, answering your question, I don´t think that they will merge (well, "merge" is not an appropriate term in this context, I should say that I don't see Google buying Matterport in the short term). |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @jfantin - Well said! Especially "I don't think that Google needs Matterport's niche market..." -- It's my inferred opinion that Google are NOT doing anything to help any manufacturer. The manufacturer needs to develop their camera to work for them, not the other way around (Re: Ricoh Theta S). The -only- way that Matterport could work with Google is to allow imagery to be downloaded to devices that have the GSV app on them as they cannot really market the legacy Business View system as only legacy Trusted Photographers have access to this (Hooray, me.) Google Street View is very good for marketing a PUBLIC place simply because it 'puts you on the map'. The navigation inside of Google Street View is rudimentary in comparison to Matterport Showcase. It's so easy to walk through walls and skip incorrectly. Matterport NAILED their system  @bonduell and I were both publicly offering services for Google Street View conversion which we have had to withdraw as it violates their terms of service. I have wrapped up many tours for clients who sold tours based on this technology. You can make some comparisons at: www.mp2sv.com -- I left the site up and re-positioned it as a 'What if?' website. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
jntooker private msg quote post Address this user | |
| This is so interesting! I agree with all points on why MP is unique and superior, I get the processing fees, accessibility, etc.; however, my question was more along the lines of "as the user sees it". Using GSV for real estate sales may be off limits for now but the hospitality industry is using it wholeheartedly. https://www.google.com/streetview/#rio-hotels-and-restaurants/gero-ipanema Again, I agree it does not compare to the quality and features you can get with MP but it is, in fact, a competitor at least in this specific market, is it not? Is anyone finding this to be true? |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
jfantin private msg quote post Address this user | |
| In my market, Argentina, I work with both, GSV and MP so I can give you a valid opinion although I am not sure if my customers are representative for your market. I have found customers only interested in GSV because they wanted a better positioning in the search engines and in Google Maps (something that Matterport cannot give). On the other hand, I have customers more concerned with image quality in specific markets (real estate, 5 star hotels). These usually go for the MP offer. In rare ocassions I have had customers asking for both (in which case I quote the combo at a convenient price). In these cases I carry two cameras (Matterport and Iris360). For the reasons explained by @Metroplex360, the possibility of getting the 360 panos from Matterport is for now impossible. In the comercial segment (shops, restaurants, etc), apparently the focus is not on image quality but on getting a wider audience and better web positioning. This is not the case in real estate, and that's why in my opinion and based on my experience working with both offerings, the two value propositions have their unique segment and do not interfere with each other. I don´t see a conflict there and certainly I don´t see Matterport biting into the GSV market that is now dominated by the cheaper 360 cameras plus the traditional DSLR photographers. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
|
UserName private msg quote post Address this user | |
| 1. Google has acquired dozens and dozens of companies. 2. Matterport recently released a press release saying,"VR Leader Matterport Launches the World’s Largest Virtual Reality (VR) Library of Real World Places (link) 3. Google probably knew that before the press release. Maybe Google might buy Matterport since Google is now heavily committed to VR. Right now, Google's Project Tango is similar to Matterport's scanning technology. And, some Google Business View photographers may compete with Matterport photographers. If Google buys Matterport, Matterport competition disappears and Google, not Matterport, owns the world's largest VR library. Google could then .. 1) Rename Matterport cameras to "Google Pixel VR" cameras since they like the name "Pixel" 2) Rename the Matterport Core VR library to the "Google Core VR" library 3) Rename Google Business Views (Indoor Street Views) to "Street View VR-Max." Photographers could then have a variety of cameras that capture VR and a variety of ways to deliver them. If they used a Google Pixel VR camera, previously known as a Matterport camera, maybe what they scanned could get routed to PC Obj models visible in PC browsers, Google Maps(street view) and VR headsets (Daydream) very quickly thanks to Google's rapid server processing. 4) Give businesses that purchase Street View VR-Max tours more benefits in the Google universe (additional presence in Google Maps, more benefits to home sellers via cheaper scans, etc.) If cheaper Daydream-certified phones come out, Google may also tap into the Samsung Gear VR market. If developers start moving away from Cardboard to Daydream, Cardboard may slowly die leaving Google and it's Daydream in charge of the VR/virtual tour world. Then again, maybe all that won't happen if Google doesn't buy Matterport. |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?