The arrogance of some add on developers that take part in this forum amazes me sometimes... Its like they forget we are their customers, perhaps if we simply stopped sending them our money in good faith all this stuff would be moot?Yes backups are safe, but some developers understand that we are paying customers and the stability of FS and WIN is still not absolute... add in the unpredictability of hardware and one can see that a hardcore simmer would need to reinstall things from time to time.Giving a paying customer access to a product they've paid money for in good faith seems almost a foregone conclusion, yet some still look down their noses at their customers over such issues...The bandwidth argument is simply insensitivity-personified ... and shows us how you feel about those who give you money...

Oh Lord, such a discussion, please someone just send him the file and be done with it! And next time make a backup!

The arrogance of some add on developers that take part in this forum amazes me sometimes...

As a (past) arrogant add on developer, I must correct something I wrote above. A blank DVD costs approx. $0.27, as I just ordered a spindle of 100 from Newegg and that includes the shipping.In my arrogant times I would spend hours piecing together ZIP files, so that when the customer downloaded them they could take four of them and burn them to a DVD. All because I arrogantly thought downloading 25+GBs of files wasn't much fun and not something people would want to do more than once.I arrogantly came to realize that not everyone had unlimited internet access, after being told by more than one customer that my product would use up more than their monthly allotment and that additional bandwidth would cost the customer. So in my arrogance, I offered to split the download into separate batches, spread out over different months.I so arrogantly preached to my customers to backup their purchase because I realize that tomorrow I could be in an automobile accident or have a heart attack. Stuff like that happens.That 25GB download would take less than an hour to burn to DVDs. Unless someone is on some super fibre-optic internet access, it's going to take more than an hour to re-download.I guess in my arrogant "I'll do anything within reason" approach towards the customer, I still expect some responsibility on their part to backup their purchase. Some may want to criticize that I, as an arrogant add on developer (past and in the future), would expect something besides the customer's money. But I feel when it's properly thought out, instead of being some knee-jerk response, that my manner is the reasonable one.

As a (past) arrogant add on developer, I must correct something I wrote above. A blank DVD costs approx. $0.27, as I just ordered a spindle of 100 from Newegg and that includes the shipping.In my arrogant times I would spend hours piecing together ZIP files, so that when the customer downloaded them they could take four of them and burn them to a DVD. All because I arrogantly thought downloading 25+GBs of files wasn't much fun and not something people would want to do more than once.I arrogantly came to realize that not everyone had unlimited internet access, after being told by more than one customer that my product would use up more than their monthly allotment and that additional bandwidth would cost the customer. So in my arrogance, I offered to split the download into separate batches, spread out over different months.I so arrogantly preached to my customers to backup their purchase because I realize that tomorrow I could be in an automobile accident or have a heart attack. Stuff like that happens.That 25GB download would take less than an hour to burn to DVDs. Unless someone is on some super fibre-optic internet access, it's going to take more than an hour to re-download.I guess in my arrogant "I'll do anything within reason" approach towards the customer, I still expect some responsibility on their part to backup their purchase. Some may want to criticize that I, as an arrogant add on developer (past and in the future), would expect something besides the customer's money. But I feel when it's properly thought out, instead of being some knee-jerk response, that my manner is the reasonable one.

It sounds to me like you went the extra mile to accommodate your customers, not scoffing at them...I'm not against backups nor do I think one should not backup software.What I am against is a developer charging for "extended" access to a product you've already paid for. And paid ALOT of money in the case of PMDG... Perhaps, if this really is a problem, developers should take a bit of their own advice, while charging $$$ for extended access and take some of that money, $0.27 to use your figures, and make the backups themselves... and perhaps just offer a service where you buy once (package price + whatever figure the extended access service cost) , pay for instant downloading then get a CD in the mail a few days later with your software on it, so you can access it as often as you want...IIRC PMDG stuff costs around $80 buck for a single airplane. And one package their MD-11 for FSX and FS9 cost $120.00!

If i'm not mistaken it says on the receipt that the download link is only good for a certain amount of time. That being said its on the customet to make a choice to either back up the d/l or suffer the consequences of having to pay for the extended d/l service to get a new link.Personally I think its fair to pay a few bucks to get it again if I fail to back up my original d/l since you're forwarned that the link isn't good forever.

So if you paid $80 or $120 for a downloaded something, why wouldn't you spend $0.27 to safeguard it and back it up?

Why charge 5 Dollars extra for things that don't come even close to 1% of that cost? Still the 'obvious' bandwidth explanation, Jim? They charge that for every year by the way. Subscription basis?However, those devs are on low numbers and they only set up these 'services' (or should I say extra barriers, to allow some more invoice items?) because they've found people paying them with pleasure.Freedom of choice again. I would have a hard time finding out who's to blame first. The company setting up those neat little barriers or the guys acting as expected?The sheer existence of such 'services' shows some attitude. So why feed the hydra? Do a backup and leave the 5 Dollar donation out.The installers are generic, so even a failed backup shouldn't mean too much trouble as you have paid for the right to own and use one, proven by the receipt. So, even legally, there isn't a barrier at all.As said, quite some other devs don't charge you for a redownload at any time. Those are the role-models!Maybe make a freeware dev happy with the money saved.

So if you paid $80 or $120 for a downloaded something, why wouldn't you spend $0.27 to safeguard it and back it up?

Jim, with all due respect, sir...Debates such as this one clearly fall short of your comprehension... perhaps thats intentional on your part... But thanks for making my point about arrogant developers!

The sheer existence of such 'services' shows some attitude. So why feed the hydra? Do a backup and leave the 5 Dollar donation out.The installers are generic, so even a failed backup shouldn't mean too much trouble as you have paid for the right to own and use one, proven by the receipt. So, even legally, there isn't a barrier at all.

You have indentified the core issue in the "extended download debate." A PMDG installation package is most definitely not generic. Each and every customer's installer is unique to that specific customer. I don't work for PMDG, and I have no intention of being more specific as to the "how" of the matter, but I would stake my life on the accuracy of my statement. You can believe or disbelieve as you choose...Considering that the NGX base installer is over 600 MB in size, the company's server-side data storage requirements would soon become unmanageable if they were to maintain a permanent copy of each customer's installer "forever". Thus, the limited lifespan of download links, and the requirement (even with pre-paid extended download service) to specifically request reactivation of the (limited time) download link via the customer support portal.Yes, some add-ons do use generic installers - the many products which utilize the Flight1 wrapper system are in that category - but PMDG does not use that system. Considering the degree to which their products are targets for pirates, I can't say that I blame them.As others have pointed out, it ultimately comes down to the customer having enough responsibility to protect their own investment by keeping the original file in a safe, known location. Yes, even the best-maintained archives can become corrupted by an unexpected system crash or hardware failure - and even a DVD can become scratched or otherwise unusable - but it seems from reading these forums that the majority of those who now require the extended download option are those who spent $70 for a product, and then promptly threw in in the recycle bin, or otherwise lost or misplaced it through pure carelessness or inattention.

A PMDG installation package is most definitely not generic.

Quoting myself from the second post in this thread.

Fortunately, devs with that extra money policy became rare these days as we're talking about generic installers, not special per-user ones, as the MD5 hash shows.

Same versions, same MD5 hashes. As some more guys bought the plane, there is plenty of input available on this.Maybe take the initial version without any hotfixes included or the latest one, with the SP1+fix.As said, the 'service' offer also offers a view on attitudes. One can support or even defend them, others may not. Freedom of choice.If both groups backup their stuff, everyone will be happy.

Quoting myself from the second post in this thread.Same versions, same MD5 hashes. As some more guys bought the plane, there is plenty of input available on this.Once again, the 'service' offer also offers a view on attitudes. One can support or even defend them, others may not. Freedom of choice.If both groups backup their stuff, everyone will be happy.

I have different MD5 hashes for two legally-owned copies of the product. (Purchase under separate orders). I can only go by my own experience. I'm not going to try to reverse engineer the individual files within the archive to see what the specific differences are. (Or if I did, I certainly wouldn't publish my findings...)Since I don't have any knowledge of how things are done server-side at PMDG, you may be correct that watermarking could be accomplished on the fly at the moment of download - but in all cases I know of where watermarked downloads are accomplished by a simple email link, any watermarking was pre-applied to the archive at time of purchase, on a file which then has to be stored going forward.I'm not saying that the way that PMDG handles their file security is the best way to accomplish IP protection. I prefer the Flight1 model, where a unique key (stored on the customer's own computer) is combined with customer-specific information (like the last 4 digits of the credit card originally used to purchase the product), in order to unlock a re-downloaded generic installer. A potential pirate might have the key, but without knowing the customer-specific data, he can not decrypt and run the installer.)Certainly the PMDG online activation system has been a serious issue for many legitimate purchasers. Too fragile by far - too many potential points of failure.

I think you mix up the MD5 stuff a bit, Jim. You, as a single customer, can only find out about how 'individual' your stuff is when you compare that MD5 hash with another individual.So lets say we both have the initial download version from August, we will both get the same MD5 hashes there. If the version is the same and only the customers differ, the MD5 should be different too. But it isn't.The large scale watermarking isn't a thing to cause size of installer x amount of customers storage demands by design. You could do it like this though, but I doubt that this is clever.

Certainly the PMDG online activation system has been a serious issue for many legitimate purchasers. Too fragile by far - too many potential points of failure.

That certainly is a big one, at any dev of course. Don't harm the customers with too fancy protection while the pirates may fly without any problems. Some devs found a nice and friendly way, without having to quit business.So far, all protection matters did not help much when it comes to spreading certain products, including the NGX. So it's a shame to see valid customers struggle with things a pirate doesn't (have to) care about. But that's more or less a general complain of mine, not a special PMDG one.As said, I take the good ones as a role-model, not the few others.

I think you mix up the MD5 stuff a bit, Jim. You, as a single customer, can only find out about how 'individual' your stuff is when you compare that MD5 hash with another individual.So lets say we both have the initial download version from August, we will both get the same MD5 hashes there. Same goes for the latest version. The version of the product has to be the same.The large scale watermarking isn't a thing to cause size of installer x amount of customers storage demands by design. You could do it like this though, but I doubt that this is clever. However, on the MD5 thing, the PMDG ones are generic.That certainly is a big one, at any dev of course. Don't harm the customers with too fancy protection while the pirates may fly without any problems.Some devs found a nice and friendly way, without having to quit business.So far, all protection matters did not help much when it comes to spreading certain products, including the NGX. So it's a shame to see valid customers struggle with things a pirate doesn't care about. But that's more or less a general complain of mine, not a special PMDG one.

If indeed multiple comparisons have been made beween different individuals all with the same hash, I will have to concede that I am wrong about the generic vs. watermarked issue. In my own case, both of the installers I have access to are the original RTM installer - one purchased by myself, the other by my nephew. They were, however, purchased two days apart, so perhaps PMDG made a slight change to a file, or files within the installer in that intervening time.In any case, I don't think that PMDG instituted the extended download service as a means of generating extra revenue. As I said, if people took the same care with protecting their downloaded installation media as they typically would with "hard" media, like a boxed DVD, then the only people who would really need the extended download service would be those few who have experienced a major system crash rendering their archived files inaccessible.One other thing to consider in the extended download charge is the fact that PMDG no longer hosts their full-product installers on their own servers - they now use the Amazon e-commerce cloud system. It does result in much faster and more reliable downloads for most end-users. I remember when the MD-11 first came out, and PMDGs servers were down more than they were up for many days after release, due to all the traffic. I don't know how Amazon bills their commercial clients for bandwidth, but it makes sense that PMDG's hosting costs might go up considerably were they to allow their customers to have "all you can eat" repeat access to 600+ MB installation files.

In any case, I don't think that PMDG instituted the extended download service as a means of generating extra revenue.

I think that's the point where people in this thread differ the most amongst each other. However, since most of such discussions usually tend to go south pretty soon, I have to applaud to your ways of discussing them, Jim. The recommendation to backup every dev's purchased work will surely the best one.

The recommendation to backup every dev's purchased work will surely the best one.

It is, although I do think that it would have been better if PMDG would give the option of a free "limited" redownloading service. Perhaps a couple of extra downloads, if after that you need to download again then people are really taking the mickey !!G