Tishma Tricks & Greed....

[Guest]

In another post that was locked a discussion was brought up about the use of Airiane textures with a Dreemfleet panel and an apparent logo that shows Dreamfleets endorsement.After pondering this thought for a while one thing I cant figure out....Why would someone pay $29.95 for DF 737-400 then go over to Tishmas site and pay again for more textures when DFleet host about 260+ textures for free on their DF site. I know that Tishma produced a 737-300 for a while but their is no real notiable difference between a 300 and 400 model. Tishma offers nothing better than DREAMFLEET.Yes I to believe that the DF/Airane thing was just for FS2000 I dont believe that Lou and Tom would continue assosiation with Tishma after the Avsim headlines about him a few weeks back...they have a better ethic than that.It would appear that Tishma uses whatever TRICKS he can to esculate his GREED...I have no use for people who steal from other developers(not mentioning any other name's C#%& )or missrepresent themselves and their assosiations with other developers.Frankly in a Nutshell...I have never been Impressed with Tishma's work.Oh by the way some reading for memory.http://www.avsim.com/pages/0902/pt_again.htmlhttp://www.flightsimnetwork.com/dcforum/Us...9d503cc53ab.jpg

[Guest UweR]

Hi,"Why would someone pay $29.95 for DF 737-400 then go over to Tishmas site and pay again for more textures when DFleet host about 260+ textures for free on their DF site."Better looks and better frames..."Tishma offers nothing better than DREAMFLEET."That simply isn

[Guest jase439]

>Why would someone pay $29.95 for DF 737-400 then go over to >Tishmas site and pay again for more textures when DFleet >host about 260+ textures for free on their DF site. I know >that Tishma produced a 737-300 for a while but their is no >real notiable difference between a 300 and 400 model. >Tishma offers nothing better than DREAMFLEET. Perhaps the better question: Why would someone start a new thread on exactly the same subject matter of a thread that was only recently just locked?

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"Frankly in a Nutshell...I have never been Impressed with Tishma's work."The new GMAX 737-300 & 400 are a collaborative effort. Many of the repainters in this forum are listed in the credits as offering their skills for the project. I agree with UWE, that visually it is the best 737. But it's not for everyone... Pilots who like to fly with a VC won't find it appealing. And the pricing structure excludes a huge market. Goes back to the old question--does one want to sell 100 units at $18.00 a piece, or 1000 units at $10.00 a piece. Does one want to sell 500 repaints at $10.00 a piece, or 5000 repaints at $2.00 a piece. I don't think the people behind Ariane understand how to price things in this market, and also they are very slow to respond to issues. Examples: the 737 has a translucency issue with the wing textures, and the flap pylon light housing goes away in the exterior view when landing lights are turned off, but not in the internal wing view. At cruise, the 737 does not fly with the flap pylon landing lights deployed. Minor quibbles, but should've been fixed in an update right away. The translucency issue goes back to the 737-400's release, I believe.As for the DF/Ariane thing, George posted the logo, and the ball's in DF's court as far as how to best handle the issue. I trust their judgement, and anything else is just wasted speculation and rumor. But I consider the whole thing making a mountain out of a molehill. Now that the matter has been raised, it's not up to us to guess and second guess.Any way, to sum up, quite a few people would disagree with your evaluation of the new GMAX 737. And I agree that the product bashing threads need to end, as some of the people involved in the Ariane product participate here amongst us, and I consider them friends.-John

[ErnieAlston 33]

I sometimes wonder if all this attention Tishma seems to get actually helps bring him new customers.Uwe is right, the final decision rests with Ariane's customers, lets move on.Regards.Ernie.

[Guest Toni Rauch]

Hi JohnNot looking to re-stir the issues here, but I'd sure like to know why the original thread was locked...The discussion regarding the merits or otherwise of the plane itself should not be called 'product bashing' - each is entitled to voice an opinion, and what represents good visuals and value-for-money to some will be seen as technically flawed overpriced and bad when to compared to other similar products, by others. These are personal opinions, but airing opinions and promoting discussion is surely what the forum is about...Lastly, you say "...as some of the people involved in the Ariane product participate here amongst us, and I consider them friends."Would you care to expand on that? No names of course, but in ALL the threads involving Ariane/Tishma etc, I've NEVER heard of ANYONE claiming to be involved with them - Tishma/Bob Hale/Bobbo of course, but no-one else. That's exactly what Tom Allensworth's expose was all about, wasn't it?Toni.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"Would you care to expand on that? No names of course..."In the docs distributed with the product, a number of people are mentioned as working on the various repaints for Ariane (the doc is found in the Ariane aircraft folder after installation). I was surprised to see this, because I hadn't seen anyone mention their participation in the forums either. But according to Ariane's own docs, people in this forum have participated.I don't understand why the other thread was locked either... There were some heated comments, but debate is important.... I voiced that thought in the thread. OTH, I was concerned that someone viewed the word "partnership" as some type of suggestion of a financial contract or dig at DF or Ariane. I meant partnership in the cooperative sense, and going back to my first paragraph, Ariane's docs cite many names as cooperative partners in the project. If those mentioned in the docs don't want to chime in here, that's their business and I respect that.Really though, to sum up, the aircraft model fills a void for some, and is fatally flawed only due to the repressive repaint policy, and infomercial style pricing and marketing. Had this aircraft appeared as a Flight1 aircraft, or an FFG aircraft, AFG, people would be singing its praises... Since we're quoting Tom, kind of goes back to what he discussed regarding the somewhat unequal standards we apply in our critiques. Pity we can't separate the aircraft from the source, because I still feel there's nothing more photoreal when it comes to duplicating what the passenger sees. I fly most of my flights from that perspective....

[Guest Toni Rauch]

<...there's nothing more photoreal when it comes to duplicating what the passenger sees. I fly most of my flights from that perspective....>....so who's flying the plane? :-eek Shame it's Tishma really as a more likeable commercial developer is hard to find ( :-roll ), but I'd level the same criticisms at that plane whoever produced it - namely, IMHO, the flight climb dynamics are ludicrous, the repaint policy is based on extortionate pricing and pure greed, and when compared to DF for example, it's bad value.However, I will concede that it looks quite pretty. (There Peter, I said something nice about it - I'm now going off to barf...)Toni.

[Guest DreamFleet]

The compatibility file was created by Lee Holdridge, not DF. We only gave permission at our end for it to be released.An e-mail was sent to Ariane this morning conerning the logo, and certain wording of the file description, both of which we would like removed from their site.Needless to say, there is no relationship of ANY kind between DF and Ariane. This is the first and last time we will comment on this matter, except to say that we allowed this file to be uploaded at the request of many customers, and I think you will find that this file has also been uploaded to AVSIM.Now, back to work for me! ;-)Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F..._FORUM_LOUF.jpg

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Thanks for setting the record straight Lou..... You show a great deal of restraint..... If someone even hinted that I was endorsing their site without permission, or by means of a strategically placed logo, you'd bet I'd litigate the heck out of them. The Dreamfleet/Ariane logo (in my view) would have caused a number of people on the fence about purchasing the product to think of it as some type of endorsement. I think Dreamfleet should be entitled to some compensation, but then again, I'm no expert in international law.I've noted that FSUIPC was added today in Ariane's Freeware download section. But there's no mention of the author.... Clicking the download button opens a solicitation for an email address. Take a look at this link, before the website gets updated....:http://www.woodlandworld.com/ariane/freewa...iewFreeware.aspI still like the aircraft, but I hate this style of presenting a product...

[Guest jase439]

So is this where I chime in with, "I toldja so?" ;-)

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"We only gave permission at our end for it to be released."I call that cooperation. What's the phrase? "Give someone an inch, they'll take a mile".... When asked for permission, DF could have said... "No way" or "Do you know the way to San Jose". :)

[virtualstuff 751]

Hmm... I'm going to do some research of my own, didn't now about this :(Andr

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

Since this has been responded to by Dreamfleet, I am locking this thread before it turns into a general free-for-all.