Sorry, post has been deleted.

I could have sworn the NDA applied to screenshots also.

If the first picture is of the FSX SP1 beta, I believe there is an NDA in place also. If it's not a picture of the SP1 beta, then please disregard.

Well, if a member of the wide beta team sets up "comparison" shots in the non-private section of Avsim, one may assume the purpose/bias.Judging from your other posts about the iFly it seems like the thin line from confidence towards arrogance was once again crossed.I mean, the MD11 could need a final fix, the J41 a more significant one (since over a year) and all we see here is another 'we are so much better' approach. Very attractive policy indeed. I don't relate you to any official PMDG movement of course, but breaking some NDA may even remove you from the closer circles, don't you think?I'm sorry, but even if the iFly may not look as good as the PMDG, their policy isn't about bashing other companies in any given way (even in their private forums), which I for one find very attractive to be honest.

Well, if a member of the wide beta team sets up "comparison" shots in the non-private section of Avsim, one may assume the purpose/bias.Judging from your other posts about the iFly it seems like the thin line from confidence towards arrogance was once again crossed.I mean, the MD11 could need a final fix, the J41 a more significant one (since over a year) and all we see here is another 'we are so much better' approach. Very attractive policy indeed. I don't relate you to any official PMDG movement of course, but breaking some NDA may even remove you from the closer circles, don't you think?I'm sorry, but even if the iFly may not look as good as the PMDG, their policy isn't about bashing other companies in any given way (even in their private forums), which I for one find very attractive to be honest.

What about the MD-11 needs to be fixed? As far as I understand it, there are only one or two insignificant text errors on one of the DU's. I use it all the time and haven't noticed these issues, or any other. In my experience, it is a flawlessly functioning product.

I mean, the MD11 could need a final fix, the J41 a more significant one (since over a year) attractive to be honest.

I don't know about MD11 (I fly it but don't experience any problems) but J41... man... it has issues which should be fixed a long long time ago!

What about the MD-11 needs to be fixed?

I've answered you in the other thread. http://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__2014803And no doubt, it is a fine ship, I really like it. Please always relate my sentences, describing the relationship between flaws and their reception.

I've answered you in the other thread. http://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__2014803And no doubt, it is a fine ship, I really like it, but please always relate my sentences.

I found more info. It will be nice when the MD-11 is patched, but I honestly didn't notice the issues until they were pointed out.

Shane, there's no doubt, you are totally right and, on the MD-11, we're not talking about big things there. On the J41, I personally see bigger ones though.As you know, I'm a fan of nearly all flight sim planes and devs, so you may guess even more that I'm running into bugs and flaws on all sides just by using them.The thing I was pointing out (in that other thread) is just that no dev on this small market can proclaim to be perfect and also no dev should try to bash another one.If you, as a dev (speaking fictional here) start a 'oh, look at them, they are so wrong' attempt, I, as a customer, start looking closer to your actions and real qualities. So while the flaws stay minor in their nature, their impact suddenly gets bigger. And that's what's happening as we speak.I'm a MD-11 fan, just like you by the way. That's my favourite PMDG ship. It wasn't cheap, it isn't perfect, but it is fun and would be even more when finally fixed.