...the product simply cannot be made to work on this guys rig and therefore is 'unfit for the purpose' which demands a full refund.

All any developer can hope to guarantee is that the product will work on a clean Flight Simulator installation with no other add-ons. The fact that it won't function for one particular user doesn't make it "unfit for purpose". The OP himself said "... it turns out I'm the only one that still has the problem." As I said in another, now locked, thread "Having just read Ariane's published terms and conditions, I wouldn't touch that firm with the proverbial barge-pole. On the other hand, I have little sympathy for anyone who has bought from Ariane having read those terms and conditions - they can't really claim they didn't know what to expect. If they didn't bother to read them then I have even less sympathy." Ariane's Terms and Conditions are quite clear "Refunds are not allowed and neither are they given on downloaded goods."

That would be fair enough if it was true, but a quick look on the thread post timings will confirm that the problem with activating the software was solved less than two hours after the original poster pointed out his issue, when I suggested a solution for it.This doesn't excuse everything that happened to the OP, but at least stick to facts.Al

Al - I'm sorry I missed that the problem was solved, and I'm happy for the original poster.Although Ariane's T & C may state that refunds are not allowed, that may well be challengeable if under certain conditions it's proved to be an unfair contract term. i.e., if someone bought a product which simply couldn't get activated, he would be fully entitled to claim a refund despite what the T & C may state.Toni.

That's certainly true with regard to it being entirely possible to challenge a contract if an independent arbitrator decides that the contract is later found to be unreasonable in some way, but in practical terms, the cost of challenging such a contract probably makes it unfeasible to do so for the price of an FS add-on aeroplane, if something is found to be amiss with the product.There are a few things with regard to Ariane Design that I'm not too keen on myself, however, on the whole I've been happy with stuff I've had from them, so although I am no staunch advocate of every single thing they do, I think it is important to remain fair with them, as with any other developer, and stick to only complaining about something which is genuinely worthy of complaint, rather than finding continuing cause for complaint in a hypothetical 'unable to activate' scenario. After all, you wouldn't complain about a car, which you don't own, breaking down.Al

Officially they do charge for reacts, 12+ euros. It's even listed in their products listings. Maybe with all the negative press about it, unofficially they are relaxing their stance.

Even though their website says you have to pay for reactivations, I have never had to do so! I have reactivated my Ariane products on numerous occasions now and have never been asked to pay a fee.Until you have to reactivate do not make they assumption that you will have to pay a fee. I have never experienced that to be the case and I know of countless others that have never paid a reactivation fee as well.It would however be nice if the activation process could be sped in up in some way or fashion.Regards,Bob

I'm flying my Ariane 737 right now and it is a great airplane. Shame people can't get over it and just enjoy a fine product.

I'm flying my Ariane 737 right now and it is a great airplane. Shame people can't get over it and just enjoy a fine product.

I have the 737-800 X2 and it does have a couple of problems though, some that don't seem to have been addressed since release. For example before your first waypoint the aircraft, will not track the planned flight, she'll deviate a distance away, and gradually close the distance the closer to the waypoint until reaching it. then she'll track perfectly. The problem gets worse the further away the waypoint is. So you have to make sure the 1st waypoint is close by. I like to use real world plans from Flightaware, so that's not always the case, and must be modified. According to the support forum they say it's being addressed. Looking back in the forum, this was originally posted in early 2009. The other problem I see, is an intermittent rocking problem at altitude, also reported by others in the forum. The response to the posters was probably a CG problem. Possible, but I was using the default passenger load. Cargo load was even at 5000lb forward and aft (Had to change the default 12000lb, because the FMC will not allow entry over 164,000lbs gross weight, even though the 800 has a MTOW of 174,200lbs.) Fuel load was 100% right and left, and 30% center, with initial fuel used from the center tanks. CG enter in the FMC was 34.1, taken from the Perf page. So I don't see how I could have lateral CG problem. If at all it would be with the pitch. The date on my installation file is 12/2008, which I assume is around the original release date. I've looked all over the site, and the only update, I see is an update to simconnect, for those who's panel is black, and that's actually from Microsoft. Unless I'm missing something, there doesn't seem to have been any patches to this model? Another quirk, (This may or may not be realistic, although I haven't seen any other aircraft require this.) In order to do an autoland, it's necessary to set the ILS to both NAV1 and NAV2, or else you can't arm CMD B during final.

According to the support forum they say it's being addressed. Looking back in the forum, this was originally posted in early 2009.

Unlike the long awaited Nav Data Manager (which seems to be hugely delayed so I wouldn't hold your breath on that one!), I do know that Ariane Design have just commenced beta testing their new FMC. What that will behold is anyone's guess, but it definitely is in testing.Just for fun, and sort of related to the original topic, can anyone tell me which FS website I took the below quote from?'Note: Digitally delivered products are not refundable.'I'll give you a clue, they are currently making an NG for FSX.Al

Unlike the long awaited Nav Data Manager (which seems to be hugely delayed so I wouldn't hold your breath on that one!), I do know that Ariane Design have just commenced beta testing their new FMC. What that will behold is anyone's guess, but it definitely is in testing.Just for fun, and sort of related to the original topic, can anyone tell me which FS website I took the below quote from?'Note: Digitally delivered products are not refundable.'I'll give you a clue, they are currently making an NG for FSX.Al

Yup PMDG! (I didn't need the clue BTW! :()

Just for fun, and sort of related to the original topic, can anyone tell me which FS website I took the below quote from?'Note: Digitally delivered products are not refundable.'I'll give you a clue, they are currently making an NG for FSX.Al

That's another developer I wouldn't touch with the proverbial barge pole.

Coming soon to PC, Xbox and PS3:CANAL BARGE SIMULATORTake your barge pole and push your flat bottomed barge up and down the canals of the world in this 100% accurate simulation of the exciting world of canal barges. Hours and hours of mild amusement for the whole family.

Actually, I wouldn't put it past these guys to make that as a sim, they seem to be simulating everything else: http://www.astragon.de/simulationen.htmlAl

Actually, I wouldn't put it past these guys to make that as a sim, they seem to be simulating everything else: http://www.astragon.de/simulationen.htmlAl

I don't speak German, but I swear one of them is a Garbage Truck sim.

Ariane's Terms and Conditions are quite clear "Refunds are not allowed and neither are they given on downloaded goods."

Here in Australia, our Trade Practices Act is quite clear: " Any term of a contract (including a term that is not set out in the contract but is incorporated in the contract by another term of the contract) that purports to exclude, restrict or modify or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying: (a) the application of all or any of the provisions of this Division; (:( the exercise of a right conferred by such a provision; © any liability of the corporation for breach of a condition or warranty implied by such a provision; or (d) the application of section 75A;is void."The UK Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 is to similar effect, so Ariane's attempt to avoid its obligations under the act by purporting to impose a condition about refunds is rubbish.Generally speaking, the supply of any goods to a consumer is subject to an implied warranty that the goods will be of merchantable quality. However, very recent authority from our NSW Supreme Court (Gammasonics v Comrad Medical Systems) is to the effect that downloaded software is not "goods" for the purposes of the Sale of Goods Act. Although the case did not involve the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act, it seems likely that the same approach would apply in that context. Digital information is not "goods" until the data is reduced to a form that makes it both "tangible" and "moveable". The position is, therefore, that you're much better protected if you buy software over the counter, as opposed to downloading it. This will not be the case for long, as legislative amendment seems highly likely.The approach in Gammasonics is consistent with the US Court of Appeal decision in Advent Systems Ltd v Unisys Corp, and also the English Court of Appeal in St Albans City and District Council v International Computers Ltd In both cases the court held that downloaded software is not "goods".All this means, however, is that legislation that relates to the sale of goods does not apply. At common law there can still be an implied warranty of fitness for purpose. If the software is not fit for its intended purpose, then the purchaser is entitled to recission of the contract of sale and a refund.I see above that it is asserted that there is no right to a refund if the software/DVD etc has been opened. Surely that does not apply in the case of a defective product? How else would you find out?Can I ask where I might find the EU provision, and who the signatories are? The UN convention on the international sale of goods specifically excludes goods bought for personal, family or household use. No doubt the poster was referring to another statute/convention.Of course, who is going to go to the trouble of commencing proceedings against the vendor of a $100 (or whatever) bit of software...? This is where government fair trading and consumer protection authorities come into play. As does the internet, by outing the scoundrels. cheers,jeff

I don't speak German, but I swear one of them is a Garbage Truck sim.

It is indeed. Still, playing with toy trucks is no more weird than playing with toy planes, so we'd better hold off on casting the first stone. :( Al

It is indeed. Still, playing with toy trucks is no more weird than playing with toy planes, so we'd better hold off on casting the first stone. :( Al

It's not a toy if it is simulated realistically Look at FS, while it does have it's entertainment value, as we all know, it (in the form of ESP) as well as X-Plane is used in professional training simulations.