The Airbus I Am Waiting For...

[MD83 1]

Does anyone remember the Pilot's TriStar (www.l1011tristar.com)? That was supposed to be released in 2004 or 2005. The news section hasn't been updated for three years ....

[aerdt 0]

There is a difference between a rumor and an announcement. In case of AirlinerXP, it was broadly announced (even to online and print flight sim media) and this announcement can be considered a "future commitment to deliver", because in 99% of all cases, announced products will actually come out as an actual product or service or else we call it "vaporware".Of course, no money has been exchanged and no harm has been done to anyone. But where would we end up, if companies just decide to announce something that will never ever see the day of light? This is not nonsense at all, unless you as the consumer will digest anything that is being presented to you. I don't think it's useless banter.What, if I would announce today a brand-new flight simulator and claim that it would totally blow away any competition, set up a webpage with screenshots and make people drool over it and then the project will never see the light of day? That's right. I would totally ridicule myself (see "Duke Nukem").Pat

[Guest JTEK99]

>What, if I would announce today a brand-new flight simulator>and claim that it would totally blow away any competition, set>up a webpage with screenshots and make people drool over it>and then the project will never see the light of day? That's>right. I would totally ridicule myself (see "Duke Nukem").And you would completely deserve it.Duh.

[Guest]

Let us not forget that 757 we are waiting for, from that other developer.............. no, not the one in 4 recent threads on here, the other one. remember it? hate to say it but feelthere appear to be one of the few who actually release something at this point. and alphasim too.

[LAdamson 240]

>What, if I would announce today a brand-new flight simulator>and claim that it would totally blow away any competition, set>up a webpage with screenshots and make people drool over it>and then the project will never see the light of day? That's>right. I would totally ridicule myself (see "Duke Nukem").>A terrible.........comparison, x( If you had assembled a knowledgeable team, and had the resources to provide a flight simulator that will blow the world away....Then excellent! Tell everyone!Difference is; you most likely don't, but Airliner XP did.Unfortunately, everything in the "real world" doesn't always work out. Some projects get delayed, or as you say, "never see the light of day". L.Adamson --- not to worried about it..

[Orlaam 306]

>Let us not forget that 757 we are waiting for, from that>other developer.............. no, not the one in 4 recent>threads on here, the other one. remember it? >>hate to say it but feelthere appear to be one of the few who>actually release something at this point. and alphasim too. >>That is an FSX-only project, so I have no plans on buying it.My frustration is with the fact an FS9 project all of the sudden becomes a dual release with FSX when that wasn't the initial representation. All comments were focused on FS9, then FSX, not FS9 and FSX. Why do we have to wait for the FSX version when all we want is the FS9 plane? Why can't they wait like we are now? It's just ridiculous how the game is played anymore. Nothing is ever truly honest in this community. All the rumors are fueled by this incessant silence on all fronts for months and months. What follows the rumors is a post clouded in mystery and no straight-forward answer as to the status of the project. I have noticed so many developers do this. What is so hard about simply telling the community that we are currently working on A, B, or C, and nothing has changed, we're just taking longer than expected. Fine, I get that. Why does the story change slightly every time we hear it? We're made to feel like loons just because we're head shy from so many bad experiences.I have no doubt the AXP plane will be a brilliant package. I've see enough screen shots and video clips to know it'll look great. I also know DF and RXP make the best stuff out there, but I didn't expect to be held back for so long because of FSX, especially when it didn't start out as a dual release plane.These comments are really meant for ALL developers, not just the AXP project. I'm satisfied with the answer we've been given thus far about the FS9 package in regards to AXP. I just want to point out that I'll no longer migrate to a new version of FS just because a product comes out for it only - never gonna happen.

[LAdamson 240]

>My frustration is with the fact an FS9 project all of the>sudden becomes a dual release with FSX when that wasn't the>initial representation. All comments were focused on FS9,>then FSX, not FS9 and FSX. Why do we have to wait for the FSX>version when all we want is the FS9 plane? Why can't they>wait like we are now? Because.......... once you find out all the neat things you can do with FSX; FS9 becomes rather lame and boring...Think about it; if you were a developer & cool things could be accomplished with the next generation sim; would you be happy spending many hours still programming something that's now "old hat"? Would you still be able to do your best? Would you even have much interest? Probably not.At the moment I'm stuck purely with FS9; and I do think it's lame in many ways compared to FSX. It's old hat, and too bad FSX doesn't have all the head room for complicated addons that I'd like to see!L.Adamson

[N400QW 205]

"These comments are really meant for ALL developers........." -------------------------------------------------------------To answer for Eaglesoft let me say that our policy is quite clearcut and to the point. We build and sell specific products for specific sim versions. For us to approach these challenges in any other way is to be irresponsible to users and Team Members alike.In addition, we believe you will see other developers taking a similar track in the near future so that users can have a choice in moving forward or staying behind.We do know that some developers feel they will gain a competitive advantage by holding producte from market until they can produce so called "dual sim" freebie type offerings which will in their minds at least make them the "developer of the week":-)We believe that approach will prove to be a not very pragmatic solution while we are all in "transition phase":-)Time will tell but we expect that developers will eventually drop new FS9 development much like they did for FS8.Hope this helps.

[mgh 89]

You may choose to believe an announcement is a "committment to deliver" but very people in the real world would agree. At best it's no more than intention and we know what the road to #### is paved with!Companies may have genuine intentions but subsequently find that in reality they can't deliver - they may find that it's technically too difficult, the development is likely to cost too much for the sales expected, they can get a better return by diverting their resources to another producr, or ultimately they just go out of business. In any of these cases the product won't be delivered.We need to be realistic and concentrate on what is actually available and not worry about what may (or may not) become available.

[Guest fabrytnix]

>You may choose to believe an announcement is a>"committment to deliver" but very people in the real>world would agree. At best it's no more than intention and we>know what the road to #### is paved with!>>Companies may have genuine intentions but subsequently find>that in reality they can't deliver - they may find that it's>technically too difficult, the development is likely to cost>too much for the sales expected, they can get a better return>by diverting their resources to another producr, or ultimately>they just go out of business. In any of these cases the>product won't be delivered.>>We need to be realistic and concentrate on what is actually>available and not worry about what may (or may not) become>available.>> >>We?This is your point of view, if you like feel free to be realistic and concentrate on what is actuallyavailable .I prefere people tha keep their words, I prefere an ethic behaviour.I'd like to buy in correct (I mean the currency of the state in wich the firm is registered) currency not in the hardest one (in a future may be will buy fs add-on with gold or diamonds?)I'd like to by an aircrafrt 1 time, not the rudder before, than the gear, than the engines,(cptsim) than the manual (wilco/feelthere), than the 800/900 series or cargo (pmdg) because some emprouvements are not been applied to previous series, and so on....I'd like to pay for a bug free software, not really bugged and not corrected after 3 or 4 service packsI'd like to pay an update cost for the new release of MS, not the entire cost as a new software.I'd like that sould be manteined a compatibility with previous product I've paid.And so on...

[mgh 89]

Getting back to the original point,If making advance announcements is unethical then the vast majority of businesses are unethical according to your definition. In the real world things happen (as I pointed out in my post) what's been announced doesn't alway get delivered. That's why realism and commonsense suggest only buying on the basis of what's actually available.The rest of your post only reinforces the point that we need to be realistic.Do you think you have a right to be insulated from international exchange rates?If you want a complete aircraft then buy a complete aircraft, don't buy one which you know is incomplete.Do you know of any bug-free software?If you chose an MS upgrade from XP Vista to XP why shouldn't you pay for it? Anyway most people didn't pay directly for XP - it came with the bundle.Whose compatability? Are you suggesting that developers should provide you with a free addon because you chose upgrade to Vista from XP? If the addon you bought was for XP then you got what you paid for and have no futher rights - the addon is still compatible with XP.

[Bob Scott 7,720]

>Because.......... once you find out all the neat things you>can do with FSX; FS9 becomes rather lame and boring...Do you mean neat things like causing an OOM with an FSX default airplane on an FSX default airport while just sitting on the ramp?Or flying to West Yellowstone, MT...you know, the one located in the middle of the Sahara Desert?Or being swatted from the skies while flying at cruise by a 180-deg shift in the direction of the jetstream winds?Errrrrr...I think I'll stick with lame and boring.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

[edetroit 933]

>Because.......... once you find out all the neat things you>can do with FSX; FS9 becomes rather lame and boring...>I wrote a full page explaining why I as a developer feel the opposite...but in fact it is the FSX vers FS9 argument that is lame and boring.So I'll just use my word of the moment.....Poppycock! :-hah

regardsEdaka Capt. P[/font color]i[/font color]c[/font color]a[/font color]s[/font color]s[/font color]o[/font color]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v640/edetroit100/Ed3.jpgMy FS9 Videos] AMD Athlon 64 3500+, 1024Mb PC3200 DDR, 300Gb HD 256Mb DDR Nvidia 7800 GTX PCI-E, Audigy 2 ZSViewsonic VP2130b 21.3" LCD[/font color

[LAdamson 240]

>Or flying to West Yellowstone, MT...you know, the one located>in the middle of the Sahara Desert?>My FSX West Yellowstone is very green and populated with thousands upon thousands of green (not sandy desert colored) pine trees! :-hah I just happened to spend a week there, last August, and only live a few hundred miles away, as it is. I'll take the FSX mountain topography & higher resolution textures for flight in this area..........any day! Actually, it's this mountain west area of the USA, that I do almost all of my sim flying. L.Adamson --- Yellowstone to the north, Grand Canyon to the south :7