OpenOrienteering Mapper 0.5.0

[puzzlepaint]

Hi,

I'd like to notify you of today's release of OpenOrienteering Mapper 0.5.0.

Again many new features made it into the program, among them overprinting simulation for improved map legibility, a separate editing tool for lines, and much more.

We recommend the update for all users of version 0.4. We consider the program stable enough for productive work now, though it is as always a good idea to make regular backups of your files. A more detailed list of improvements and the download link is in the official announcement:

http://oorienteering.sourceforge.net/?p=141

- Thomas from the OpenOrienteering project

[puzzlepaint]

OpenOrienteering Mapper 0.5.1 was released today. This is a maintenance release which fixes a number of problems that were found in 0.5.0. Major changes are:
- Fix for a Windows and Mac OS X printing bug with area fill patterns.
- Fix for the program hanging in special cases when following the shape of an existing object while drawing.
- Fix for dashed, closed lines being invisible if too short to have a gap.
- Fixes for drawing tool quirks when finishing a path by double click, especially while holding Ctrl.
- An improved method of overprinting simulation.
- Fixes to the DXF import.
- New and updated translations: French, Latvian, Norwegian and Spanish.
- Qt library updated to 5.0.2.

We recommend the update for all users of previous versions. The link to download the new version is:
http://oorienteering.sourceforge.net/?p=165

[Angry Haggis]

The UK O-mapping community has, I think, somewhat standardised around OCAD 9, so an OCAD 9 importer/exporter in OpenOrienteering Mapper could potentially result in a big jump in usage in the UK. As things stand, OpenOrienteering Mapper is certainly looking promising for "low risk" brand new maps of small areas, e.g. parks.

[Red Adder]

I have certainly focused on OCAD9 for map production over the last 20 years, having produced more than 130 maps (mainly schools but also competition areas up to 10 sq km). Having used earlier versions of the product I appreciate how the tool has been developed and improved.

Whilst I applaud those developing OOM they do have a big task as they really have to meet all OCAD's functionality as a mapping and planning tool, to its very high standards, before they it can be accepted a true alternate to OCAD9 by all but the occasional mapper.

When OOM reaches this benchmark they will have two potential advantages over OCAD. 1 is price (OCAD is not cheap, especially if a club needs more than one copy - I think OCAD missed a trick but not going down the club license route). 2 OCAD is not really being developed as an O mapping tool(v10 and v11 offered nothing to as club mapper that justified the cost). There are certainly tweaks that most regular users could identify (esp in the planning tool) but they are probably non-essentials or each only relevant to a few users so not cost effective for OCAD to develop.

[King Penguin]

Doesn't OOM only need to compete on the mapping functionality ? There are already cheaper alternatives to OCAD available for course planning.

[ba-ba]

started using OOM earlier in the year, very intuitive and easy to get in to. However, it's taken me quite a while to get going on what is a very promising urban area!

[John-O]

Doesn't OOM only need to compete on the mapping functionality ? There are already cheaper alternatives to OCAD available for course planning.

PurplePen is cheaper - It is free. It lacks a few things that OCAD can do but is getting better with each release. It is also easier to use for simple events and it was used for the British Sprints.

As far as mapping functionality is concerned, OOM already has many features which are poor or lacking in OCAD which make it easier to use and it gets better with each release.