Developers of Activesky, FSMeteo, et al, please support the new freeware interface module, FDS Connection by the freeware organization Flight Deck Software.Here is the chance for both developers and end users alike to have freedom from licensing, royalties, and outrageous pricing of otherwise commercial interfacing utilities. I think freeware/payware products are analogous to general aviation and commercial aviation: although we don't always realize it, both are interdependent on the success of one another. FDS Connection, properly supported, has a wonderful chance at refilling a sorely need niche in the simming community, free from profit motives and restrictions thereof. Please consider developing future versions of your interface-dependant software around FDS Connection.

As has been pointed out in another thread (did you scan the threads before making this post?), let me make one thing clear about FSUIPC:As a freeware developer, I need to pay nothing, and my users don't have to pay anything. Pete has in place a process by which freeware developers don't have to pay. As for payware, many had a free ride on Pete's work for a long time. In spite of that, if they follow Pete's protocols, the end user doesn't have to pay a dime.Flight Deck's contribution I'll try as a developer, since it does at least avoid the certification process Pete's put in place for freeware developers w/FSUIPC. That makes it easier for me to beta my work among a select group.I agree with you that often overlooked in the praise of Pete and FSUIPC are the 3rd party applications which helped make it great. But let's keep the high ground, and keep supporting Pete and his work if not in coin, at least in praise. You never know when Pete will discover something as he has in the past which turns out to be a "must have" with the sim....-John

HiI really didn't mean to make this a debate about 'Pete' okay? I was simply encouraging deveolpers to support a new alternative to commercially available interfacing utilities, not mentioning any names of commercial add-ons okay?Thanks.

To be completely accurate, of the three interfacing utilities available to freeware developers, none require payment from either freeware user or freeware developer. Period.To editorialize a bit, competition is always a good thing for the consumer, however I'd prefer one 'standard' to avoid conflicts. I foresee having three utilities in my modules folder doing exactly the same thing. That can't be good for my frames or yours. To freeware and commercial developers alike: Please support the best interface there is. Just don't support all of them.

I believe you said:"Here is the chance for both developers and end users alike to have freedom from licensing, royalties, and outrageous pricing of otherwise commercial interfacing utilities."Don't know of any utility other than Pete's which you could be referring to... So in response to your quote:"I really didn't mean to make this a debate about 'Pete' okay? I was simply encouraging deveolpers to support a new alternative to commercially available interfacing utilities, not mentioning any names of commercial add-ons okay?"Why don't you lighten up, OKAY!!!!##!!!

>Hi>>I really didn't mean to make this a debate about 'Pete' okay? > I was simply encouraging deveolpers to support a new>alternative to commercially available interfacing utilities,>not mentioning any names of commercial add-ons okay?>>Thanks.Then I'm sure we'd all appreciate you first of all getting your facts right and second of all apologising for the intolerable slagging you seem intent on delivering against a genuine, honest individual who's never done you any harm and has made more of a contribution to this hobby than you ever will by your incessant whining. You don't even seem to be able to take a hint. Genuine simmers are watching and are wise to you and your transparent deviousness.What axe are you grinding, we wonder? So far you have made NOT A SINGLE POST about the features of this new package. Just expect us to `support` it. Why, when EVERYTHING it offers seems well catered for in the freeware arena by something that is tried and tested, and fully supported?Allcott

Seems like a couple of you folks in this thread stand to lose something by some freeware competition, hmmmm. Kinda makes me a little suspicious of you indicting me for attacks I never made. I don't believe I menitoned any product's name or author in my original message.I do believe it's you who is trying to start a flame war and them placing the 'blame' on me. What is your stake in all of this? I think I already know the answer.

"Seems like a couple of you folks in this thread stand to lose something by some freeware competition, hmmmm. Kinda makes me a little suspicious of you indicting me for attacks I never made. I don't believe I menitoned any product's name or author in my original message."You specifically mentioned commercial interfaces to FS.... Only one that I know of--FSUIPC.... Same thing as my saying "let's get some new blood in the Presidency". I don't have to say "George Bush"--who the heck could I be talking about otherwise?Boy, talk about a poor introduction to the forums.... Do a search on JohnCI and FSUIPC.... I've taken tons of flak for saying, among other things, that having to go through a "certification process" for my freeware software is ludicrous. I've had people trash me for even suggesting that Pete wasn't successful on his own--that it was the work of freeware designers like myself that gave purpose to FSUIPC. I am ecstatic that I may have a alternative for my utilities. But I don't appreciate anyone, especially a newbie to these forums, dissing freeware designers' credibility by making this seem a war against commercialization in the hobby. FDS's product will fail if it gets linked to freeware in this manner, as if it's some liberator from commercialization. As someone pointed out, there's a solicitation for donations on their site. That's already giving me second thoughts about linking my freeware to their product. I would be doing them a favor by converting my applications to promote their product--not the other way around. If I didn't know any better, I'd suspect you may have motivation other than the goodness of your heart to be promoting their product, since I've never seen you in the forums before today....

John,I'm saying let there be an alternative to payware interfaces. I'm not affiliated with anything nor do I have any other scandalous motives for gosh sakes. I've only recently purchased FS2004 and yes, I'm a newbie in terms of the new sim but I'm a veteran with FS2002. I did not, have not, and will not target any product or person with disparaging remarks so please stop trying to catagorize me like that. I think that developers should simply look into embracing a freeware product that I believe has some potential. Please don't attack me if you disagree is all I'm asking. State your opinion, yes, but leave it at that. Okay? Thank you.

>Here is the chance for both developers and end users alike to>have freedom from licensing, royalties, and outrageous pricing>of otherwise commercial interfacing utilities. I suppose you go to work for nothing then. FS would not be like it is now without Peter Dowson.I am getting a bit sick of this #### and running the bloke down. Perhaps the admin should start blocking these threads regarding the FSUIPC digs at Peter Dowson.......Anthony

"Please don't attack me if you disagree is all I'm asking"That's fair enough.... I plan on sitting down with the SDK this weekend and seeing if I can convert Autoland 2002 to work with it. I've already converted Landclass Assistant to FSConnect, which is Russ Dirk's utility. I'm not against FSUIPC either, but I see my job easier as a single-handed developer when I don't have extra steps to follow to certify my work. And I apologize for use of the word "newbie"...I didn't mean the sim, only that I noted you are new to the forums. -John

"I suppose you go to work for nothing then."I am going to take him at his word that he isn't picking on Pete. In that context, that's exactly what we do when we develop freeware--we go to work for nothing every day, other than sharing with those we hope may become friends through our hobby. I appreciate praise of Pete, but Pete would have no success becoming a commercial developer without those of us who "work for nothing" supporting his work with our own. We helped make FSUIPC a simming household name. As for blocking threads that discuss Pete, might as well shut down the forums. I've seen threads thrive for days taking potshots at freeware designers. As long as we can keep it civil, even heated discussions like this one serve a purpose. Maybe one being more appreciation for those of us who worked behind the scene with Pete's work. You don't have to use my work or recognize it, but collectively as a group I'd argue the freeware community that evolved out of FSUIPC is arguably as great a contribution as FSUIPC itself. I'm glad Pete can profit from that....I'm one of those who long for the dot.com days where anyone with a good idea stood the potential of making money. Pete works hard for his, and has earned every cent.-John

I didn't run anyone down, I didn't refer to anyone or anything by name. Blocking threads would be a great form of censorship for sure, allowing a moderator to style collective public opinion and ideas as he or she sees fit.But this isn't what these forums are about, at least not for most of us!

Making stuff for FS2k2 or FS2k4 is not work. Anybody that considers it work should quit doing it. If you can't do it for the pure pleasure of self satisfaction and furthering the hobby, just quit. Personally, I'll look forward to FDS connection. Same with FSConnect. Thanks for the heads up. Although the name could cause some confusion among the future fans of your freeware product.

I didn't make it :) I just wanted to encourage developers of software needing to utilize interface modules to consider it as an freeware alternative. I agree with you about having fun. If you're not enjoying the hobby or if it's 'work' making things for the sim, heck, do something else before you die. Life is too short to be frustrated or miserable.