I have paid tons of money in payware and frankly the rule of thumb is that we are all beta testers! That is the way the industry has gone....look at Microsoft...how many updates have we downloaded since its release...of WinXP and NT for that matter. The trend has been set so this is what we have to live with. I tend to purchase things as they are released so I have to suffer through the teething problems until all the patches are released.If I were smart...I would wait 6-10 months before purchase the addon stuff! Of course there is lots of good Freeware stuff out there so there is an option to be a beta tester.Tony

>Just because consumers ask to release it, would it not be>easier for the developer to fix the major bugs before>releasing? Wouldn't that make the final release go smoother? >It would, but they dont do that. Well- not to be bias, but since were naming names here there is ONE company I know that puts out a great product and I have yet to purchase one aircraft of theirs that needed my beta testing (at least none I am aware of...) They made the C421, Meridian and an AI traffic program that I am sure will be worth the wait...

Hi Jose, in reading your post I discover my post could have been interpreted in a different way than the one intented when written.In relation to the inital post, what I wanted to say is that there is no such a "standard quality level" shared accross the vendors, (as compared to for example the similar quality level you could expect when purchasing either Adobe Premiere or Pinnacle Studio) and partly one of the reason of such could have been the point that some are not relying on this business as their sole income. This however is in no way diminishing the talented individuals you are refering to, but at the same time from the original poster point of view, some of these other "apparently less talented individuals in his opinion" are tarnishing the offerings of the others "better talented" considering some of the reactions read in this thread like "I won't buy a payware until..."...Of course, a lot of people not spending their 100% of work time doing this business are not only extremly talented (many can think of Pete Dowson and FSUIPC for example when he was not doing this full time), and as you pointed out, many are offering a very good after sale suppport.In the end, as often experienced and like I tried as importantly to write in my initial post, the perceived "lack of" quality in a software in this market is 99% of the time related to the complex integration of each and every single user hardware and software environement to run it with. If it was so easy, do you believe we would have to have that huge number of sliders to adjust the performances in FS (Microsoft should have figured out a simple way, hey, they have the means and knowledge to simplify this for the user), and why isn't there a universal FS optimized configuration for all?Best,

>... but I would like to see more proof of beta testing ...>>There are numerous developers with exceptional quality control>that prove the system works. It has been said above, not all>reported bugs/issues are corrected and make it to the final>release; and some developers allow to be pressured into rushed>releases.>>I have thought about adding a few "rushed" and truely bad>releases, but will not do so afterall, we all know them. Some>releases have matured to reliable products, and some>developers have listened to customer complaints and matured to>serious partners again.>>But to prove my point, consider these virtually bug-free>softwares...>>- PSS Dash 8>>- PSS Avro Vulcan>>- Flight1 Meridian>>- RealityXP GNS530>>- RealAir SF.260>>- MAAM B-25>>- RCS B-25>>- Dreamfleet 2000 C310>>Some have undergone maintenance and optimizations, but you can>use the 1.0 version of each of the above equally well. Quality>control isn

I dont know all of the above aircraft but do the compare in complexity to the PSS Airbuses, PIC767, PIC320 or SSW 310? Having said that the PIC767 was almost 'bugless' and probably the most complex yet.RegardsHoward

I have been a beta tester for a number of software products and have found that a great many of the problems I reported were ignored. I even got into a major arguement with a developer that demanded that I get a new printer because the softwear didn't work with my printer and they were not going to make it compatiable. It would have been fine if I had a strange printer but it was a mainstream HP one.Jon

Apart from a force feedback service patch (due to the impossibility of us testing every single make of FF stick)we haven't had a single bug reported for the SF260, and looking at other developers there is a lot out there which is pretty bug free, though I concede there are a few that aren't so clear of them.We've had hundreds of requests for a quick patch for the SF260 in FS2004 and though it is frustrating for people to wait, we want to get everything as perfect as possible before releasing. Thanks for including us in your good guys list!Regards,Rob Young - RealAir Simulations

Rob,You and the RealAir Simulations team are clearly at the top of my "quality" aircraft list. I would not hesitate to purchase the first release of anything you guys produce. BobP :)

"You and the RealAir Simulations team are clearly at the top of my "quality" aircraft list."Mine, too, Bob. I'm tired of all the pay-to-beta-test, purchasing hassles, and often times "memorable" support. RealAir will get my money for any payware GA aircraft they produce. Simple as that.