Pros of Leaflet

• Open-source and lightweight, making it more flexible and customizable
• Supports a wide range of map providers, not limited to Google Maps
• Large community and extensive plugin ecosystem

Cons of Leaflet

• Less comprehensive documentation compared to Google Maps
• Fewer built-in features, requiring more custom implementation
• May require additional plugins for advanced functionality

Code Comparison

Leaflet:

var map = L.map('map').setView([51.505, -0.09], 13);
L.tileLayer('https://{s}.tile.openstreetmap.org/{z}/{x}/{y}.png', {
    attribution: '© OpenStreetMap contributors'
}).addTo(map);

google-maps-services-js:

const client = new Client({});
client.elevation({
    params: {
        locations: [{lat: 45, lng: -110}],
        key: 'YOUR_API_KEY'
    }
})
.then(r => console.log(r.data.results[0].elevation));

The Leaflet code focuses on map initialization and tile layer setup, while google-maps-services-js demonstrates API interaction for elevation data. Leaflet's approach is more front-end oriented, whereas google-maps-services-js is designed for server-side use with Google Maps APIs.

Pros of OpenLayers

• Open-source and free to use without restrictions
• Supports a wide range of data formats and sources
• Highly customizable with extensive API and plugin ecosystem

Cons of OpenLayers

• Steeper learning curve compared to Google Maps
• Less comprehensive documentation and community support
• May require more setup and configuration for basic use cases

Code Comparison

OpenLayers:

import Map from 'ol/Map';
import View from 'ol/View';
import TileLayer from 'ol/layer/Tile';
import OSM from 'ol/source/OSM';

const map = new Map({
  target: 'map',
  layers: [new TileLayer({ source: new OSM() })],
  view: new View({ center: [0, 0], zoom: 2 })
});

google-maps-services-js:

const { Client } = require("@googlemaps/google-maps-services-js");

const client = new Client({});
client
  .elevation({
    params: { locations: [{ lat: 45, lng: -110 }], key: "YOUR_API_KEY" },
    timeout: 1000
  })
  .then(r => console.log(r.data.results[0].elevation))
  .catch(e => console.log(e));

OpenLayers focuses on client-side map rendering, while google-maps-services-js is primarily for server-side API interactions. OpenLayers offers more flexibility for custom map implementations, whereas google-maps-services-js provides easier access to Google Maps services and data.

Pros of esri-leaflet

• Integrates seamlessly with Leaflet, a popular open-source mapping library
• Provides access to Esri's extensive collection of basemaps and data layers
• Offers a more lightweight solution for web mapping applications

Cons of esri-leaflet

• Limited to Esri's ecosystem, which may not be as versatile as Google Maps
• Requires an ArcGIS Online account for some features, potentially increasing costs
• May have a steeper learning curve for developers unfamiliar with Esri products

Code Comparison

esri-leaflet:

const map = L.map('map').setView([51.505, -0.09], 13);
L.esri.basemapLayer('Streets').addTo(map);
L.esri.featureLayer({url: 'https://services.arcgis.com/....'}).addTo(map);

google-maps-services-js:

const client = new Client({});
client.elevation({
  params: {
    locations: [{lat: 45, lng: -110}],
    key: 'YOUR_API_KEY'
  }
}).then(r => console.log(r.data.results[0].elevation));

Both libraries offer straightforward ways to create maps and access geospatial services, but they cater to different ecosystems and use cases. esri-leaflet is more focused on web mapping with Esri data, while google-maps-services-js provides a broader range of Google Maps API services.

Pros of react-google-maps

• Specifically designed for React applications, providing React components for easy integration
• Offers a higher level of abstraction, simplifying the process of adding Google Maps to React projects
• Includes additional features like drawing tools and custom overlays out of the box

Cons of react-google-maps

• Less flexible for non-React projects or when more direct control over the Google Maps API is needed
• May have a steeper learning curve for developers not familiar with React concepts
• Potentially larger bundle size due to React dependencies

Code Comparison

react-google-maps:

import { GoogleMap, Marker } from "react-google-maps"

const MyMapComponent = withGoogleMap((props) =>
  <GoogleMap defaultZoom={8} defaultCenter={{ lat: -34.397, lng: 150.644 }}>
    <Marker position={{ lat: -34.397, lng: 150.644 }} />
  </GoogleMap>
)

google-maps-services-js:

const client = new Client({});
client
  .elevation({
    params: {
      locations: [{ lat: 45, lng: -110 }],
      key: "YOUR_API_KEY",
    },
    timeout: 1000,
  })
  .then((r) => {
    console.log(r.data.results[0].elevation);
  })
  .catch((e) => {
    console.log(e.response.data.error_message);
  });

Pros of deck.gl

• Highly performant for rendering large datasets and complex visualizations
• Supports a wide range of 2D and 3D data visualization layers
• Integrates well with React and other web frameworks

Cons of deck.gl

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive API and capabilities
• May be overkill for simple mapping needs or small datasets
• Requires more setup and configuration compared to Google Maps Services

Code Comparison

deck.gl example:

import DeckGL from '@deck.gl/react';
import {ScatterplotLayer} from '@deck.gl/layers';

const App = ({data, viewport}) => (
  <DeckGL layers={[new ScatterplotLayer({data})]} initialViewState={viewport} />
);

Google Maps Services JS example:

const client = new Client({});
client
  .elevation({params: {locations: [{lat: 45, lng: -110}], key: 'YOUR_API_KEY'}})
  .then((r) => {
    console.log(r.data.results[0].elevation);
  })
  .catch((e) => {
    console.log(e);
  });

Summary

deck.gl is a powerful data visualization library for creating complex, high-performance map visualizations, while Google Maps Services JS focuses on providing easy access to Google Maps APIs for various mapping services. deck.gl offers more flexibility and advanced rendering capabilities but requires more setup and expertise. Google Maps Services JS is simpler to use for basic mapping needs and integrates seamlessly with Google's ecosystem.