Sign in to follow this  
Guest Captain Barfbag

What a lame excuse

Recommended Posts

"Weather Maker No Longer to be Freeware?"I read this press release and the title of this thread immediately came to mind.To suggest they have a policy of not charging for software that is not entirely theirs and then to suggest that Pete Dowson's decision is prompting a rethink is weak as ....FSUIPC should not be the vehicle for this kind of rethink after all Pete Dowson has made noises along the lines of continuing to support freeware programs. If they have a product that will stand up to scrutiny and sell on it's merits -- by all means make it commercial but don't hide behind a smokescreen.Software developers that use a half baked excuse such as this deserve to see their potential market move away either to freeware alternatives or to current payware options that are up front and honest in their marketing. At the end of the day supporting a product that identifies itself as payware from the start will most likely result in the development of all the bells and whistles needed with the right level of support and in doing so consign pretenders to the trash can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

How many times have you downloaded an aircraft texture, only to open it up and find that the model is payware? Do you grumble about wasting bandwidth and push the Delete key, even though you just spent half an hour on dial-up? I know I do.It sounds like the Weather Maker guys are concerned about the same sort of thing. They don't want to put in a disclaimer that says, "You have to go out and buy ZZZ software before our product will be of any use to you." They want to package all the necessary parts in the download so you won't have to deal with it. This is a good practice, and I wish more people did it. (The downside, of course, is that it makes the downloads larger.)I work in the software development business. The true cost of delivering a line of code is staggering, when you count all the design, code, test and support that it involves. People who do this "just because it's fun" are doing us all a service, but at some point it becomes a burden. If some of these folks can get a little compensation for all the late nights and lost weekends they've put into this, great. And for all the work they've already done for for free, a hearty "THANK YOU!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To whom it may concern -You are entitled to your opinions. But before you judge the press release let me give you the reasons behind it.Originally, weather maker was to be only a freeware product. We debated about that before release of the original version because of the amount of time in development. The ultimate decision for going with freeware was because we could not in our minds charge for something the was dependant upon someone else's work (Pete Dowson's FSUIPC). Since then we have been in contact with Mr. Dowson about paying him an percentage of our revenue if we begin to charge for Weather Maker Professional. That way it could cover our time in development costs. For every moment we spend on weather maker that takes us away from other projects that could render us revenue. We all have to live you know. Originally weather maker was to be only a one time project. But because of the overwhelming response, we decided to go further with it. Thus the Professional Edition.We still may issue it as freeware, ultimately it is my final decision. Hopefully, that has cleared up some misunderstanding. I just ask that the next time you have a question or issue, please contact me first before others. My email is: reedstough@calibresoftware.com.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Reed,if and when you make it payware,would you please make sure i can buy it with other means than a creditcard?i really like weathermaker:today i put in temp,dewpoint and the whole lot exactly as it was here,and it started to rain.....then going down for a drink,i saw it rained outside too...I DO NOT WANT TO MISS THIS PROGRAM!thanks for makin' it guys!!!kind regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AndyWell we might as well face it.The heart of the hobby is being ripped out and being replaced with a cash register.There is really no use grousing about it as the majority of simmer`s now agree that being compensated financially is the way to go anymore and that the satisfaction of contributing to the community is not enough.There are still a few notable exceptions(ISD,Posky etc) to the above but I see a chain reaction coming that will rock the freeware world.I can inmagine what is going through the minds of these groups as they see all these former freeware programs fall to the siren song of the almighty dollar and why should`nt they go and get a slice themselves.I know I would in the current enviroment.I guess it`s up to the individual weather they want to keep reaching for that brass ring of the realistic FS experience and I for one am wavering.Well summer`s here in the U.S and getting some sun sounds like a good idea to me.Catch you on MSM mate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Well we might as well face it.The heart of the hobby is being ripped out and being replaced with a cash register."There's tons of freeware still out there. Those who decide to go payware get a lot of press, but there's dozens of utilities, aircraft, scenery, that would last anyone a long time. Pete's deciding to go payware isn't going to end FS. Heck, we don't even know how FS2004 is going to work. Maybe Pete's utility isn't needed.When I was growing up, we had a radio station called KMEL that ran the blurb "If you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own." My challenge to anyone thinking freeware is going to die--go out and write your own utilities, design your own aircraft, your own scenery. Build up your own user base. If you find the cost and effort worth it, and both approximate what those going payware experience, then maybe you are in a position to critique those who decide they have to earn something to continue.I don't see anyone complaining about the pirated file that got posted in Avsim's library yesterday, yet their were something like 80+ downloads before it got pulled. There was one forum post on the subject. Yet freeware, dare it go payware, and it's the crime of the century!Sounds to me like a mixed set of values...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive got a few hundred hours in this scenery but almost quit on it. Why because no one expressed any interest in it. Its the gimme, gimme, gimme mentality that make many of us not come back for more. When was the last time you sent a quick emial to anyone and thanked them!. Not very often I suspect. If people were alittle less selfish and learned to respect the individuals that slave over their freely given talents I suspect there would be many more good freeware scenerys and planes than there are now.And you know what if I was five times better at creating scenery than I am and I had a sellable product I would probable give it to my friends and anyone who politly ask for it in private. And the rest "charge em". If they want it no strings attached they could pay for it thank you very much.So dont go banging on people who charge for a well thought out and time intensive product. Many of those products could have been freeware if not for the gimme gimme gimme's out there!Dennishttp://www.wagsterstuff.com/private/edw02.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ci"When I was growing up, we had a radio station called KMEL that ran the blurb "If you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own." Well that explains a lot to me about your mindset as you took every part of my post out of context and turned it torwards your own agenda.I have been around this hobby long enough and deeply enough to see where the wind is blowing my friend.Instead of superimposing your thoughts on my post I suggest you read it again and take it for what it`s worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DennisIf you were addressing me I invite you to look at this thread.http://forums.avsim.com/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=57014&page=Have I posted?What did I say?Now I ask you,Do you feel foolish?By the way I like the looks of your scenery and hope you release it to the community.You know not everyone in the community is gimme gimme and some folks would use that and be grateful to have it.I know I would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After your last "discussion" with me, I expected this response. My reply is not just directed at you, but at the other members of the forum who care to listen--and it may surprise you, but some do care what I have to say. Based on your petty tirade last week, I've pretty much shut your opinion out, and don't care to second guess what you mean between the lines. I also tend to see people who use words like "turned it towards your own agenda" as people who have a bit too much personal feeling invested in the hobby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Not really I was just addressing the general mentality that pervades the FS community.Great SceneryTake careDennis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ci i know what you are trying to do and I`m not going to allow you to bait me.You are irrelevent.I do find it interesting though that seeing that you`ve tuned me out that you found the need to reply to my post in the first place including quotes.Talking about personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brothers and sisters as the hot rodding Rodney King would say:Cant Cant Cant we all just get along. :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give it a rest, will ya! People who make it a point to personally attack everyone, and everyone's opinion, get removed from these forums. Without regard to age, race, religion, creed or color, I expect you to conduct yourself so when you disagree, you do so without telling others where to go, what to do, and when to do it. If you don't understand that, the only bait you need to swallow is the "get lost" bait. You can disagree with my opinion all day long. Say "John, your opinion s*cks". I won't take issue with it. But last week you launched an attack against me that you seem intent on continuing here, simply because I asked the moderator to remove a post with a potential libel lawsuit written all over it. Stop it, now, or else I will ask that you get yanked from the forums. Nothing personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CiAgain you try to bait me.I suggest you give it a rest as I`ve not attacked you except in your own perception.My original post expressed an opinion that you took offense to and responded.I responeded in kind.If you can`t take dissenting views I suggest a different venue would be something that you may want to explore.Have a nice day.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically Carmine, I think Iron Claw has something valuable to add. It's just that he doesn't have the means to follow up without some slight or attack against the person, vs. the thought.Had he cared to look at my posts regarding Pete's decision to go payware, he'd know I was dropping my link to FSUIPC in favor of my own means for grabbing data for MSFS. It is simply too difficult to stay freeware and be beholden to a third party commercial vendor, especially after building up a user base. I also maintain, and have been slammed by the "Pro Pete" forces, that Pete is only able to go payware in part because of the demand freeware applications have built for his product. Even if Pete is going to include a stripped down IPC for our use, the point is we'd have to answer to him in some way as freeware developers. I can't see myself doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just see my reply to Carmine, since we can't have a dialog directly. I have two very strong, and conflicting opinions on this issue. I suspect one of them is very close to yours.I'd love to see an honest discussion in the forums surrounding it. You are among the few who dared even risk offering a dissenting opionion, since I perceive many of the posts regarding Pete as an attempt to--well--kiss certain parts of his anatomy. I will argue that Pete has a right to go payware, but I will also argue that freeware developers don't have to embrace it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HiI will again invite all to reread my first post which in so many words is a resignation to the fact that payware is a dominant forceand likely to become more so.I attack no one it`s just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JohnLet`s bury the hatchet on this one.I`m resigned to the payware issue and extremely saddened to see this happen.I thought my original post expressed this.No hard feelings Ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the larger issue here is the fact that some of the software that has gone from "Freeware" to "Payware" has not lived up to the expectations. Especially so when the add-on costs almost 1/2 as much as the original product. FSUPIC has (by being freeware) allowed almost anyone to develop any add-on product (freeware or payware) with little or no control over the quality. Personally I'm glad to see Pete move to a Payware stance giving him some control over the products that use his product (I'm sure many of the updates we've seen have been a result of inferior add-ons).I would like to see the Payware community offer MUCH MUCH more "Preview" access for customers. Too often have I paid for a product that now sits dormant on my shelf (or in my local landfill) because it was a bad product. Considering that the electronic entertainment industry is well on it's way to topping the combined sales of the Motion Picture and Music Industy, with only 1/3 of the costs, more care should be taken to ensure customer satisfaction.Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Rob and Everyone -It is evident that this is an extremely touchy issue. The original press release was not to spark this kind of a response. Being a developer I have a tremendous amount of respect for those that have produced very good add-ons for Flight Simulator 2002 and such. To properly develop a good product it takes a lot of time and energy and I think they deserve to be compensated for it. I agree that there needs to be more trialware out there. I have been burned several times by products that I have spent $30 dollars for and they don't work. That is probably what has caused this great divide. The fact is I do not look forward to this, because it can be very risky to set up accounts for this kind of thing. If your product doesn't sell as well, it could cost you more than what it cost to develop in the long run.So my commitment to you all is that IF we have to begin charging for Weather Maker or any other product that is an add-on we will first offer it as trial ware first. And if you don't like it you don't have to use it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one concern IMHO. I don't have a problem paying Pete for the continued availability and support of his fine FSUIPC product -- or for high quality add-on planes, scenery or other utilities for that matterBut I have a HUGE problem paying every developer that relies on FSUIPC additional coins to offset his/her cost to Pete for the right to it.I've also been in and around the software development arena since 1980 (a long time) and am well aware of the costs of creating and supporting a software product. I am very familiar with the "round table" discussions regarding how much to charge for a potential offering. There is no way any of the payware groups supporting us Simmers will ever see a penny of true profit. At best they may cover the cost of the equipment, and development tools they need to do the work. And if everything goes well maybe even a little extra spending money to take their family out ever so often.In the end we each decide exactly how much we are willing to fund this hobby once beyond the initial purchase. The vast majority of FS users never get beyond opening the box and loading up the game. If you were to ask one of them to pay another 50 or 75 bucks to buy one more airplane and maybe a scenery and even a utility, they would laugh in your face. Face it, we are not a very big part of the FS world -- just very loud.Sorry, didn't mean to carry on this long, but yelling and screaming over something we have ZERO control over seems, well silly. IMHO :-)Racartronit means something, but I just can't remember what

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've followed this debate for two weeks, and here's my take.One, I don't feel that the practice of charging for FSUIPC is terribly bad. However, I do believe that it is the hard work of other developers that has made FSUIPC such a valuable commodity.On it's own, FSUIPC is an amazing piece of code. But is not really something that one might pay for separately. Just like Direct X is not something I would want to hitch up to pay Microsoft for, despite the usefulness of it.However, it's the applications that USE FSUIPC that has made it invaluable. Weather Maker is but one. And this is where I have a problem. Pete created freeware, brilliant as it was, then let other developers increase the value of his own software. Now, once the software is considered indespensible, he wants to charge for it. And now, the developers who helped raise the value, now either have to pony up to Pete, or stop using the product.Sound's pretty crappy to me.Imagine had MS developed Direct X and given it away, only to now, at DX9.0a, tell all the developers that they had to pay MS for development costs and licensing. Now, everything that uses Direct X must pay a fee to Microsoft. Does that seem right. We'd scream our bloody heads off. The issue here, is not whether Pete deserves to be compensated for his work. The question here is, is it fair for Pete to ask for compensation, since it was the hard work of others, that made his product so valuable in the FS market in the first place.What makes a diamond valuable? The diamond itself? or the value someone attaches to it. The same goes with FSUIPC. Is it valuable because of what it does, or what others have done with it. And if that is the case. Who deserves the compensation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I've followed this debate for two weeks, and here's my take.>>One, I don't feel that the practice of charging for FSUIPC is>terribly bad. However, I do believe that it is the hard work>of other developers that has made FSUIPC such a valuable>commodity.>>On it's own, FSUIPC is an amazing piece of code. But is not>really something that one might pay for separately. Just like>Direct X is not something I would want to hitch up to pay>Microsoft for, despite the usefulness of it.>>However, it's the applications that USE FSUIPC that has made>it invaluable. Weather Maker is but one. And this is where I>have a problem. >>Pete created freeware, brilliant as it was, then let other>developers increase the value of his own software. Now, once>the software is considered indespensible, he wants to charge>for it. And now, the developers who helped raise the value,>now either have to pony up to Pete, or stop using the>product.>>Sound's pretty crappy to me.>>Imagine had MS developed Direct X and given it away, only to>now, at DX9.0a, tell all the developers that they had to pay>MS for development costs and licensing. Now, everything that>uses Direct X must pay a fee to Microsoft. >>Does that seem right. We'd scream our bloody heads off. >>The issue here, is not whether Pete deserves to be compensated>for his work. The question here is, is it fair for Pete to>ask for compensation, since it was the hard work of others,>that made his product so valuable in the FS market in the>first place.>>What makes a diamond valuable? The diamond itself? or the>value someone attaches to it. The same goes with FSUIPC. Is>it valuable because of what it does, or what others have done>with it. And if that is the case. Who deserves the>compensation?i think...I MYSELF THINK(just to clear it up for some people:this is MY OPINION!!)that Pete Dowson has made fsuipc to what it is today,thus i feel that if someone is going to charge for it,it should be Pete.who are the others you claim have made fsuipc to what it is today?if i'm correct it is Pete who has coded this,who has been up giving people advice,who has been integrating ever more features into it,who has redesigned most if not all of the code...and if it wasn't for the change in his personal circumstances it might still be freeware...only thing i see is more and more OTHER applications needing fsuipc...using it to their benefit...thats okay,cos it is there,and it will always be available to freeware designers as well...i think it is only fair that payware designers pay a fee,if they don't want,well,they'll have to design their own...might be harder then you thought you know :-)IMHO Mr Dowson deserves to get some compensation out of it,and if somebody doesn't want to pay him,don't use it!disclaimer:this is just my opinion,and if you don't like it.....TOUGH LUCK MATE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>But I have a HUGE problem paying every developer that relies>on FSUIPC additional coins to offset his/her cost to Pete for>the right to it.>OK - agreed but as I understand the concept - There will be a version of FSUIPC that you can buy from Pete that is FULLY functional, therefore you need not pay additionally to a third party developer.The third party developer will have a version of FSUIPC locked to his/her product that is not fully functional but specific. The third party developer *should* ( I say again *SHOULD* ) offer a version with FSUIPC or not if you have the full version.A lot of this is still being worked out so the final result may look nothing like what I've described.hth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this