Категория: Android: География
Compare Cities 0.9aa — довольно интересное приложение для устройств на Android предназначено для тех, кому интересна география. Программа Compare Cities даёт возможность быстро сравнить два выбранных города по таким параметрам, как площадь, население, год основания, плотность населения и часовой пояс. Помимо этого к каждому городу доступны для просмотра дополнительные данные при помощи перехода на страницу, содержащую описание города на информационном портале Wikipedia или на официальном сайте для данного города. База содержит информацию примерно о 950 тысячах городов со всего мира. При нескольких вариантах городов со сходными данными есть возможность выбрать требуемый. Также приложение поддерживает обратную связь с разработчиками для пополнения и изменений в базе данных программы.
Возможности Compare Cities:
Смотрите также программы:
By Eric Larson 2013-01-03 21:42:07 UTC
Comparing major cities is an apples-and-oranges kind of game.
Sure, New York's got Times Square, but London has Piccadilly Circus. The Colosseum in Rome is no doubt a historic, must-see landmark — and so is Paris' Eiffel Tower. It's all a matter of preference. But what if you're just looking to compare two cities based on straight-up, unbiased stats?
A new comparison engine called VERSUS IO. launched earlier this year, lets you pull up side-by-side analogies of 240 cities from around the world. The website uses a natural language algorithm to pull stats from across the web, comparing more than 100 criteria, and presenting it in a plain, pros-and-cons format.
Ramin Far, the site's founder, says VERSUS is an ideal way to cut out the middle man if you're looking for a new place to travel or relocate to.
"If you're trying to decide between two things, whether it's what phone to buy, what restaurant to eat at or what city to move to, it usually takes a while to sit down and search both," he tells Mashable. "With VERSUS, you can just type in the name of the two you want to compare. It's a very, very simple approach, but you get results and data immediately."
When comparing New York City to London, for example, you're presented with a list of pros (or "reasons") for each — in this case, 17 for New York and 28 for London. Criteria like "number of airports," "cost of public transportation" and "population density" are listed with a brief explanation and a reference to the information's source.
Whatever city has the more favorable data, then, gets the "reason." (One of London's pros, according to the site, is its significantly lower murder rate compared to New York: 2.1 to 6.4 murders, respectively, out of every 100,000 people).
See the screenshot below (click to enlarge):
It's important to note that VERSUS' comparisons are strictly based on hard data. If you're wondering about a more cultural aspect — say, which city has the best music scene or cheapest dumpling restaurants — you're still better off asking a local.
VERSUS was originally launched in July as a comparison engine for tablets, cameras, apps and other tech products, using the same algorithm to pull data into a list format. The city feature was added this fall. Far says he plans to keep adding cities to the site and, down the line, maybe even people.
"For people, we'd compare celebrities, entrepreneurs or politicians," he says, "and probably look at data relating to net worth, number of startups, education, CVs — things like that."
What do you think? Would you use VERSUS to compare cities, devices or — maybe at some point — people? Tell us what you think about it below.
Make a comparison chart of specific factual information about each city; for example, you might list such factors as the geographical size as well as the population of the metropolitan area, the average temperature and rainfall, the crime statistics for both urban and suburban areas of the city and the percentage of change in the cost of living index. This kind of factual information, all of which can be stated in numeric form, is available on such sites as the U.S. Census or City-Data and provides a starting point for your comparison. Use a highlighter to mark the more appealing figures; for example, perhaps you would highlight City A because of the weather, while City B would get the nod for lower crime statistics.
Select for research two or three more subjective areas than those you compared in Step 1. Choose such elements for comparison as transportation, environment, education, healthcare and/or employment opportunities. Your research might turn up information, for example, that tells you that Eugene, Ore. is "the greenest city in the country" in 2010, according to National Geographic's Green Guide. On the other hand, you might find out in your research that the schools in one particular city are in turmoil or that there is virtually no public transportation available to residents. Make notes on the facts you uncover.
Use a site such as Sperling's Best Places to make cost of living comparisons between two cities. By entering the amount of your salary and the names of the two cities you are comparing, you will be able to determine how far your salary would go in each city. For example, according Sperling's index, a salary of $100,000 in Kansas City, Mo. would have to increase to $191, 945 in New York City because New York is 92 percent more expensive than Kansas City.
Use travel guidebooks to compile lists of activities and cultural attractions for both cities. List activities you enjoy or might like to try. If you're into cultural attractions, look for opportunities to hear music, visit galleries and museums and see theater. You might be the outdoor type, in which case you would look for how far outside the city you'd have to go to find fishing, hiking or camping areas. Check for opportunities that exist in each city for participation and spectator sports. Go to the tourism sites for both cities and check out what kind of events are listed through the course of the year.
Make yourself a visual presentation. Use four sheets of poster board so you'll have plenty of room to create compiled lists for each; title the sheets: Positives --- City A, Negatives --- City A, Positives --- City B, Negatives --- City B. Transfer the information you have gathered in the four previous steps to the appropriate sheet. For example, if a city offers full public transportation, that fact would go on the positive side; if a city offers very little in the way of opportunities for outside activities, that information would go on the negative side. When you're finished transferring the information, compare cities, giving particular weight to factors you consider vital to your lifestyle.
By Diane Schmidt. Moving Expert
Diane E. Schmidt is a published author who owes her succession of moves to growing up on a fifth-generation farm where the longing for change was deeply rooted. Read more
Updated August 09, 2015.
When trying to find the best places to live, it's always a good idea to compare cities and further, to compare neighborhoods. After all, when you go to buy a car or a house or any big ticket item, you usually try out a few models or visit a few homes before you decide. The same tactic applies to finding the best places to live - do it before you start planning your move.Best Places to Live: How to Compare Cities
Continue Reading Below
Neighborhood Scout: Neighborhood Scout lets me enter in an address or zip code and provides an overview of the neighborhood. And better yet, you can compare where you currently live to another neighborhood or use the tool to find a similar neighborhood to the one you're living in. I can also see at a glance where the highest crimes rates are or where the best schools are located. Most of the overview information is free. If you want to dig deeper, they do charge a fee. I suggest using the free version to get a sense of the area then if needed, sign up for a subscription. Note that a one-month subscription will cost you about $40.00 but cheaper options are available if you sign up for the six month option.
Area Vibes: I use Area Vibes all the time when hunting for real estate in another city and neighborhood. It's a great free tool that provides information on crime, education, jobs, housing and even weather for most areas in the US. It allows me to also look up commute times, and provides a map with all the local amenities for any particular address. Highly recommend it.
Walk Score: Unlike the other two neighborhood comparison tools, Walk Score focuses on walkable communities and provides detailed information on amenities, commuting options and bike-ability with heat maps showing restaurants, for instance. At a glance, it provides a listing of neighborhoods within the area you're searching to show which receive the highest ratings. It also provides links to apartment rentals and has locals available to answer any of your questions. It's a great tool to begin any search in particular if you're more interested in a walkable community than one where you have to get in your car to drive to the grocery store. Again, highly recommended.
Continue Reading Below
Below is a 2-page spread from my book. Here are the directions. Note how much easier these directions are compared to any of the thousands of Spanish learning guides out there. (1) Find what you want to say on the left page. (2) Follow the arrow to the right page (3) Say the Fun Spanish phrase quickly with emphasis on the starburst word or image (4) The Spanish follows. (5) Learn to string together numerous phrases which will make you sound very competent. (6) Draw your own pictures to help with memorizing and pronounciation. Fun Spanish works because it's just English and you CAN'T make a mistake. Don't ever waste your money on a Berlitz or Inlingua product again.
Here are 2 pages from my book. There's lots more information below!
Here's what people are saying about Fun Spanish.
My book is divided into 5 chapters: Greetings, Helpful Phrases, At the Restaurant, Questions and a Fun Puzzle. Fun Spanish is 5 1/2 inches by 8 1/2 inches, 24 pages with large, easy-to-read type, plenty of art and perfect for a trip or a lesson for students. You'll love teaching children with Fun Spanish. All ages love it. There's also a Fun Spanish puzzle in the back that you can play with friends or on a flight.
Hopefully, you can see how fun and easy learning Spanish is with Fun Spanish. Your friends, teachers, students and fellow travelers will be very impressed with your newly-found knowledge. Don't ever let anyone tell you that learning Spanish is hard, difficult or boring. With Fun Spanish. it's easy and fun. Gloria Cudia, from Rockford Park, IL, purchased Fun Spanish for The United Way and loves it for work and her grandchildren. "It's muy fun," she tells us. Thank you for your enthusiasm Gloria.
Here are the phrases you'll learn in my book:
How's it going? Fine and yourself? Fine With pleasure My pleasure Welcome Good or nice Yes I must. What do you say? Not much, yourself? What's new? The good one In a moment A little bit With me? Can we. Yes/No That's great Beautiful Handsome Happy I know/I don't know Comfortable My friends Where do you live? Here? Not here? I'm drinking it Also? With you? As if. I'd like. Do you have. Delicious I'm enjoying it With cheese Some water With lemon Drinks Bacon Chicken Duck Octopus Sweet potato Wine I'm thirsty Shrimp Tuna Asparagus Pepper Spinach Who? What? Is it? Are there? Where? How do you say? How? I don't know how. Remember you can combine or alter these phrases to create hundreds, if not thousands of new phrases.
There is no better product for learning Fun Spanish. I'm the only person in the world who replaces Spanish with English words. Replacing Spanish with English is a logical, easy and fun way to learn Spanish. Other methods use boring, endless lists of indirect object pronouns and intransitive verbs. Have you tried Berlitz, Inlingua, Rosetta Stone or any of the other methods? They're all the same - a waste of your money. Until now, there was no alternative. Now you have one in Fun Spanish.
Hopefully, I've convinced you how easy Fun Spanish really is. I think it's a shame that we've been brainwashed into thinking it's difficult. Try Fun Spanish. It will change your life. And for only $4.99 plus free shipping, you'll find it a bargain. And remember my motto, If you can speak English, you can speak Fun Spanish. I have plans for other fun languages too like Fun Japanese and Fun Italian. Please stop back often for updates and mention my new book to your friends.
Print this form to purchase Fun Spanish by mail order:
This tool is designed to help you hold Mayors, City Council Members and Police Chiefs accountable for police violence. You can use the tool to compare the 100 largest cities in the U.S. to identify which cities have the highest levels of police violence. You can also compare cities with similar sized populations and crime rates to show that, even under similar circumstances, some cities have higher levels of police violence than others. In doing so, we hope you will be better equipped to hold policy-makers accountable for changing the policies and practices that make police in their cities more likely to kill civilians. And after you've explored this tool, click here to learn about police violence in your state.
In 2014, 1 in 3 U.S. police killings happened in the 100 largest cities.
Black people were 21% of the population and 40% of people killed by police in these cities.
Most unarmed people killed by police in major U.S. cities were black (56%). Fewer than 1 in 5 (19%) were white.
An unarmed black person living in these cities was 6x more likely than an unarmed white person to be killed by police. An unarmed black person was almost as likely as an armed white person to be killed by police.
The Police Homicide rate for black men in 17 cities is higher than the U.S. homicide rate. Black men in these cities have a higher chance of being killed by police than the average American has of being killed by anyone .
Black men in six cities face a higher chance of being killed by police than the average American has of being killed in a car accident.
Use the "Find Your City" field to show data on one city or the "Filter by State" field to show the largest cities in a particular state. You can filter by race by clicking on the name of the race in the color legend and selecting "Keep Only".
For anyone thinking to move to Montreal here are some good and bad points.
Diversity is plentiful, you can be in any part of the city and always find a variety of foods in restaurants, cafГ©s, super markets and more.
Most people here are pretty friendly.
There are so many languages your almost certain to find someone speaking your language.
Cost of living is average compared to other major cities.
The crime is a little high, but still not to bad.
The apartments are pretty dirty and run down so if you are looking to move here make sure to get something newer.
There are several areas that have bug issues either cockroaches, ants, or spiders. Most cockroaches infestations are near the metro stations. The spiders and ants are closer to the water or wooded areas.
Finding work can be very difficult if you don’t speak French and don’t have a diploma of some sort.
Schools are plentiful in English, French and other languages.
The weather can be pretty cold in the winter and humid in the summer, fall and spring can vary from wet and cold to mild.
In my opinion if you don’t speak French don’t move here, unless it’s just for studies.
Unlike the more generic measure of ‘net density’ presented in the previous pages, residential urban density measures how many people live in relative proximity in cities, shown below by the number of people living in each square kilometre of a 100 x 100 kilometres urban region. Residential density is largely driven by topographical constraints, the location of public transport and other infrastructure, but also by each city’s inherited traditions of urban culture and development. Density differs widely, from the high densities of Hong Kong, Mumbai and central areas of Istanbul and Shanghai to the much lower density pattern of London. Johannesburg shows limited areas of higher density set around a downtown that no longer has a residential population, in the midst of a very low-density sprawl. Istanbul, New York and Hong Kong show how topographical constraints drive densities that rise to ‘spikes’ in Manhattan and parts of the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens in New York, and in Hong Kong Island and Kowloon in Hong Kong. Sao Paulo is multi-centred and similar in its overall density pattern to Mexico City, yet Sao Paulo’s skyline is dominated by high-rise apartment blocks, while Mexico City’s is consistently low-rise, demonstrating that high-density can be achieved with different types of built form.Signs of ageing
The age distribution among urban populations reveals a considerable variation that closely mirrors national and global demographic trends. Hong Kong, along with European and North American cities, reflects a more mature average age compared to cities in developing countries, even though New York and London have younger populations than rural areas in the US and UK respectively. These cities reveal a ‘middle-age spread’ in line with declining birth rates and longer life expectancy. The story is different in contexts of rapid urban growth. The age pyramids of Mumbai and Mexico City – and to some extent Istanbul and Sao Paulo – show the dominance of younger rural-to-urban migrants, with many residents below the age of 30 providing a broad base for the labour force and the large informal sector they work in. Shanghai graphically represents the ageing structure of its population, reflecting China’s one-child policy and heavy in-migration from rural areas. The remarkable drop in life expectancy, especially among men, of people above the age of 50–60 is noticeable in Mumbai, Istanbul and Johannesburg, indicating limited access to health care, high levels of poverty and poor environmental quality.Infrastructures of Mobility
Transport infrastructure is a critical driver of urban form, enabling the centralisation of economic functions and the accommodation of a growing population. Without public transport, space-hungry motorways dominate, resulting in more sprawl and congestion. The oldest and most extensive metro, bus and rail systems are in London and New York, creating high levels of accessibility. Hong Kong’s younger metro network extends to approximately 250 kilometres (155 miles) through ten lines with further extensions underway, connecting new towns to the CBD. Like Hong Kong, Mumbai and Istanbul are constrained by topography and have developed efficient and affordable public transport. Sao Paulo and Mexico City, which are not geographically constrained, have allowed the car to dominate, even though Mexico City’s 177 kilometres (110 miles) of metro carries as many passengers daily as London’s 402 kilometres (250 miles). Shanghai is investing heavily in metro and rail transport, while Johannesburg has insufficient affordable public transport and relies heavily – as do Sao Paulo and Mexico City – on informal and unregulated collective taxis and mini bus services. Despite the recent addition of the Gautrain, Johannesburg’s rudimentary transport system fails to connect to the places where most people live.How people travel
How people travel within cities reflects the provision of public transport, local economic development, climate and urban form. Public transport accounts for 40 and 50 per cent respectively of all trips in London and Hong Kong, and 60 per cent of work trips in New York. In Hong Kong, nearly 45 per cent of trips are made on foot which, together with high public transport rates, gives it the greenest modal split of Urban Age cities in the developed world. Despite differing economic profiles, nearly as many people drive in Johannesburg as they do in London, reflecting the dearth of any form of affordable public transport system in the South African city. A third of all trips in Sao Paulo and Mexico City are made by private car, but just 6 per cent in Mumbai. Non-motorised transport rises in less developed, dense cities: 45 per cent of trips are on foot in Istanbul, and in Mumbai and Shanghai more than half are on foot or bicycle. Shanghai has experienced rapid growth in public transport use, while cycling remains prevalent (despite having dropped dramatically and being banned from some central streets): a feat not achieved by any other UA city. Even where there is a good metro system like in Mexico City, informal transport often dominates, reflecting a mismatch between travel patterns and infrastructure as well as the relatively high cost of public transport.Urban Age cities compared
Behind the statistics of global city growth lie very different patterns of urbanisation, with diverse spatial, social and economic characteristics that dramatically affect the urban experience. In addition to standard measures of population growth and density, the economy and transport use, LSE Cities has assembled data from a range of official sources on energy consumption, global CO2 emissions and health, allowing a preliminary assessment of how these nine world cities compare to each other on key performance indicators.
A graphic summary of these results offers some striking differences, especially when it comes to their speed of growth. While Sao Paulo has grown nearly 8,000 per cent since 1900 and London by only 16 per cent (having experienced its major growth spurt in the previous century), it is Mumbai that is predicted to grow the fastest of the nine, with 44 additional residents each hour by 2025. London, however, will only gain one person per hour, Johannesburg three and Hong Kong seven. These trends mask different patterns of age distribution: close to a third of the residents of Mumbai, Johannesburg, Sao Paulo and Mexico City are under the age of 20, while in Shanghai and Hong Kong the younger generations shrink to 20 per cent or less. Patterns of habitation also differ significantly. The populations of Hong Kong and London are very similar in size, but the population densities within a 10-kilometre (6-mile) radius from their geographical centres (Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon in Hong Kong and Trafalgar Square in London) differ by a factor of three. Shanghai’s central area density is as high as Hong Kong’s, but drops off sharply beyond a 10-kilometre (6-mile) radius, while Hong Kong remains dense across the built-up urban region.
Of all the Urban Age cities, Hong Kong possesses the lowest murder rate, of less than one homicide per 100,000 inhabitants a year: safer even than Istanbul and Mumbai with less than three each. Sao Paulo, Johannesburg and Mexico City prove to be the more dangerous places to live – ranging from 13 to 21 murders per 100,000 people. With the exception of Hong Kong, these findings are paralleled by the level of income inequality indicated by the Gini coefficient – a measure of income distribution with a higher number representing greater inequality – in each of these cities: Johannesburg, Sao Paulo and Mexico City are the most unequal cities, followed closely by New York, with London being the most equitable. Hong Kong is the exception, being the only city that is both unequal and safe.
GDP per capita is highest in the global cities of London and New York (US$60,831 and US$55,693 respectively), followed by Hong Kong (US$45,090). People living in these three cities are many times wealthier, on average, than in other Urban Age cities such as Istanbul and Sao Paulo (US$ 12,000–13,000) and Johannesburg, Shanghai and Mumbai (less than US$10,000). Yet despite the fact that Mexico City’s per capita income is less than a third of New Yorkers’ (US$18,321 versus US$55,693), residents of Mexico City own nearly twice as many cars (360 per 1,000 people versus 209) and use roughly the same amount of water per person as Londoners (324 litres/570 pints per day). While Johannesburg, London, Hong Kong and Mexico City contribute similar levels of CO2 emissions per person, the number doubles in Shanghai, where more than 10,000 kilograms (22,046 lb) per person are produced every year, owing to the presence of heavy manufacturing industry in its vast metropolitan region. In contrast we can see Istanbul, with close to 38 per cent of its workforce in the manufacturing sector, the highest of the Urban Age cities, producing just 2,720 kilograms (5,996 lb) of CO2 per person, while Mumbai’s residents contribute only 371 kilogram (818 lb) per person – less than 10 per cent of that of residents in other global cities.
There is significant variation in life expectancy among the Urban Age cities, reflecting a multitude of factors, including the quality of health infrastructure, effectiveness of national public health policies as well as environmental and social conditions. On average, a Hong Konger lives 30 years longer than a resident of Johannesburg and still ten years longer than a person who is brought up in Istanbul or Sao Paulo, while residents of Shanghai can expect to live three years longer than New Yorkers. In Mumbai, although life expectancy has not yet reached 70 years, it performs well compared to the national average of 62 years.