FSUIPC is now Payware???

[gosta 0]

Hi John,as far as freeware is concerned, allow me to qoute 'straight from the horse's mouth', so to speak:"For freeware that agreement will probably always be an arrangement to get free access keys for as long as the application remains free. Whether that needs keys which expire now and then and so need renewing, or can work with everlasting keys, really depends on the plausibility of the freeware status and some knowledge of the bona fides of the developer and/or manufacturer. Clearer? Regards, Pete"Cheers,Gosta. http://hifi.avsim.net/activesky/images/wxrebeta.jpg

[Guest CharlesH]

Hi:I can truely understand why Pete is doing what is doing. He has my full support to charge a reasonable fee. I think what ever he produces will be great. Sure Pete could have charged a fee from the very start, but that then and this is now. People are having economic problems all over the place, people have been laid off, fired, ect. So I don't blame him one bit for asking for a fee for this program. I am sure he not going to be a billionaire over this new program either. So people can face the facts, you can buy it or not buy it, its peoples choice here. It would be great if everyting is free to all users, but the realities have changed. He has my full support, people don't know all the details that went behind his decision, nor his personal financial picture either. Let this discussion die down and move on. It does no one any good to rehash this whole thing over and over again. It really just becoming a flame war again.Charles

[jcboliveira 1]

"A., because there is an opportunity for competition to arise, and B., the functioning of hundreds of other add-ons aren't dependent on them. If someone doesn't like a certain add-on plane, they can wait for a freeware one that may be even better, or another payware one that may be cheaper."There is competition and alternative, several authors don't depend on FSUIPC for their project, in fact there is another solution from MS, netpipes SDK. The problem is:- The SDK doesn't have support for any other language besides C and is not 1/10 user friendly as FSUIPC.- FSUIPC developer document is very extensive and detailled;- There is direct contact with the author to solve problems;- There is comunity support for it.Each payware author now has a simple decision to make: Do I pay for FSUIPC use or spend some men hour to use/develop an alternative. But every add-on author already has to face that kind of decision. As an example, if the program is in C the tools can be free (GNU based tools or Borland line command compiler) if in VB then he has to pay to MS. It's easier to make in VB but he has to pay for it. Even if someone from the comunity make an alternative there is always the possibility of not allowing payware authors to use it.Jos

[Guest]

I don't understand this hobby anymore, and I've been into it since the late 1980's. Instead of it being a way for like-minded individuals from all over the world to celebrate, and enjoy aviation (which is what it was), it's now turning into a vile commercially motivated enterprise. So now the one module that opened up the world to us is going to be payware. I think this is the last straw for me. The funny thing is, I don't care about a lousy 20 or 30 bucks here and there, and my payware addon collection proves it. BUT now, just to be able to get things like Squawkbox to work in FS2004, we have to shell out money? What ever happened to developers just enjoying the satisfaction of everyone's enjoyment and praise for their creation? I'm sorry, but this really has me steamed. It's just one thing after another. I mean, there are fantastic addon makers like the guys that made the Dash 7, the Aero Commander, and the POSKY fleet and others that just do it for the love of the game. Well, as far as I'm concerned, FS2002 is good enough for me, and will be the pinnacle of my flightsimming days. I just can't imagine what will happen next. My only hope is that some programming genious out there gets as fed up as I am and creates something similar to FSUIPC so that all can continue to enjoy other addons for free (Remember, a lot of freeware addons interface with FSUIPC). And to those that will jump to defense of the developers, I fully understand the amount of effort put into creating for Flight Simulator. I used to make FS5.0 aircraft with BAO Flight Shop way back when. Now that took time and effort. No WYSIWYG CAD programs to help you out. But the thought of charging money never crossed my mind, or any of the others at the time. We just made something, posted it to the BBS, and enjoyed the feedback from fellow pilots. To those developers that continue to produce soley for the love of flying, I give my thanks. It's you guys who made this hobby what it is, not the payware folks. Sorry for the rant, but I had to vent somewhere.

[Guest Tim W]

>My basic philosophy is this--if you are going to charge for>something, do so from the start. Don't let people grow>comfortable to it then pull it out from under their nose.Derek,Yes there were personal financial reasons why Pete felt that he had to start charging for the amount of hours he was spending on keeping this utility up to date with the advances in the simulator. Your "basic philosophy" above is totally niave. FSUIPC was a utility that was freely produced by Pete for a hobby he loved to allow programmes to interface with each other. Situations alter cases and Pete's financial situation changed drastically in recent times. Not to mention the commercial companies who realised they needed this utility to make their products work with FS and so were therefore making money out of a utilty he produced for nothing.It doesn't really matter whether you agree or disagree about whether you should pay for it. Just try removing the utility from your modules folder and see how many of your commercial and freeware addons will function without it being there.I say good luck to Pete, I hope he makes enough out of the utility he created to give him a comfortable living from the proceeds. To me it's no different than expecting to recieve royalties from a song I'd written being played on the radio or used in a movie.RegardsTimhttp://forums.avsim.com/user_files/16673.gif

[Guest]

I was one of the people who Pete discussed this with. He was planning to go commercial before but I told him to try the donation model first. I was totally convinced that people would recognize what Pete has done for this hobby (heck he even got Avsim awards for it!) and that donations would be flooding in. Honestly I believed that we would all show Pete that we cared for what he has done. At that time we did not have any product using FSUIPC (we have our own module (ViMaCore) that does the same job) but even so we asked our customers to consider donating something to keep Pete going. Well, I was dead wrong. A few meager bucks were send, most of it from friends and people using his software commercially. Pete was upset and I was just seriously disgusted. Pete is not in it for the money, he spends half his waking hours expanding and supporting FSUIPC, it's more than a hobby, it takes hardware to test, connection costs etc. It has far outgrown the simple interface it was.If 25% of the users of FSUIPC would have donated a few lousy dollars we would not be in this position right now. Right now, as some writers here note, there will be a lot of small addon builders that have to start considering their options. We have seen some emails to ask how much we would charge for providing the same options as Pete does (waste of time btw, we would not dream of coming near Pete, if only out of respect). But my point of view is simple, Pete tried it another way, but the community did not want to support it. Now don't blame him for asking money for his work. Other people are making money on his work, we did by using it for FSFalcon). If you find it unfair, try doing it yourself and see how long you last as freeware developper.Sometimes I wished I would sell lawnmowers or something...Mathijs KokLAGO

[John_Cillis 2,406]

I was afraid the donation plan wouldn't work for Pete, but I don't fault the community for that. I am uncomfortable with donations, as there is almost never a formal agreement, license or contract between the parties. Then there are issues of people's perceptions (however wrong they may be). For some reason, if you "tell" someone they have to pay, it's sometimes considered more classy than if you "ask". There's a certain segment that always equates asking with begging, or threatening. I think Pete's style of asking for donations was perceived in the latter category--so a large number of people said "if he may go payware anyway, I'll just wait until that happens".And I know if I had anything remotely close to what Pete offers, and asked for donations, I'd be treated with the same cold shoulder. Years ago, I wrote a shareware program called CDBASE (I still use it today for tracking my own music collections). It was downloaded about 75,000 times before I sent word out that sites should drop it. I received two checks, but hundreds of emails asking for support (oddly, the second check came about a year ago, ten years after its original release). It's human nature--force people to pay, and most will pay. Don't, and they look at you as a "fly by night" operator, and Pete is hardly that.So don't fault people for not donating. And people shouldn't fault Pete for getting some compensation for the next set of FSUIPC releases. Especially if he is going to offer IPC functionality for freeware use. I suspect that covers at least half of the users of his product, who may never see what it can do for MSFS.-John

[Guest guyjr]

Nope, sorry, that logic don't fly here. Expressing an opinion contrary to someone else's is NOT considered uncivil. At least not in the free world.

[Guest]

Bravo Charles..

[Guest Ron Freimuth]

>well the way i see it is all the payware companies>(PSS,Wilcopub, Dreamfleet, etc) should be forking aver a>percentage of their profits to pete. sorry payware companies,>i love your products but you should be paying pete some>royalties. Dreamfleet AC DO NOT require FSUIPC!Ron