I tried the FlightCraft Airbus A330-300 preview last night.Everyone's install should be so easy!I had the problem of crashing at Fly Now due to a duplicated contact point (fix discussed in another post reviewing this package) so decided to uninstall it.However, when I uninstalled it, it took out the A330 gauges I was using for a POSKY A330-200 too.I presume the same thing will happen with the 200I guess that I should have just deleted the Flight Craft's aircraft folder.

yeah, I hate automatic installers and uninstallers. I've spent more time frigging around trying to find what went wrong and what went where than I've ever saved, by a big margin. Some are cool, but it seems that now people are doing them even for repaints, argh....EDIT: didn't mean to knock flightcraft. From what I've heard it's a superb package and I'm looking forward to flying it. I meant automatic installers in general.blllg

I started this thread.It just so happens that I tried the PW variant in the A330-300 that has the crashing at Fly Now issue.I'm not trying to knock Flight Craft and intend to try the preview(s) again. A warning like, "This uninstall will remove the Eric Marciano A330 gauges you may be using with other Airbus A330's If you want (inexplicably) to continue to use these other aircraft, please just delete the Flight Craft folders in the FS9 aircraft folder".

The moral of this story is don't install installers directly into FS.I HATE self installers, and thus always "install" them into a temp directory and move the files over myself, this has a number of great benifits for me.1) I know exactly what files I have put in and where they are2) Your add/remove programs list does'nt get cluttered up with a ton of unistallers.3) I have noticed some time ago, that some uninstall files that are associated with these installers, sometime overwrite other uninstall files, they don't have unique filenames, thus you end up with a number of installed programs that will not unistall, a right old mess.So I do not allow installers to install into FS anymore.Dan,

The moral of the story is don't use aircraft that come with installers. I don't. Not even to direct to a different folder. Unless it's a sophisticated payware addon. These installers add registry entries, mess up my program files and 99% of the time are configured by someone who knows nothing about programing. They can literally hose your entire system. I used to have an old system I'd use to download and run em if I really wanted em'. Then I'd repackage em', re-upload em' to my site and then download them again without the installer. What a hassle; but the only way to be completely safe. Nobody is being done a favor with a download that comes with an installer. I loathe em'. I won't use em'. Users that download third party addons know how to install the goodies by hand. If they don't, they soon learn.

I sence a bit of unreasonable negativity here, so I thought I'd add a few comments, please do not read this as a debate starter, merely a correction of facts, and explanation of reasons.The fact is that the FC installer only READs registry entries to find out where the FS2004 is installed! So thats not really an argument (in this case)<..and 99% of the time are configured by someone who knows nothing about programing>again this is not needed unless one uses selfmade programs!! (we dont)What system is that? If an advanced unpacking (installer) can hose you system, I would suggest that it was very unstable before running the installer.See, thats a thing that I can asure you is NOT true, if you have ever tried releasing a plane or scenery, you would know that quite a large percentage of people who download the file(s) run into problems when unzipping, this is typically gauges that cause the problem. And because a lot of people install into other directories that the default directory, it introduces more trouble (hence the reg. entry lookup).So bottom line. The reason that we make installer is to make sure things go the right place. (I know about the gauges being removed during unistall...FIXED)Best regardsPeterFlightCraft

No, don't really mean to be negative. Just to point out problems with installers. My problem is I don't know who configured the thing. If it's something from MicroSoft, I don't worry about it. If it's something from someone I don't know, it's a big worry. You should ask my wife about installers. She ran a simple little exe one day for one of her game addons and but for "System Restore" her whole system (XP on a nearly new machine) was wasted. All thanks to a simple little exe from an unknown programmer. The "System Restore" worked or it would have had to go back to the shop for a reformat. I can understand an author's frustration. He probably gets dozens of emails from users trying to figure out why this or that isn't working and it's likely cause the user hosed the file placement. There's a very small percentage of users who probably shouldn't be using a computer or simply don't know how to follow simple directions; but they're a very small percentage. Most of us are very competent and very thankful to all the freeware authors. You included. Your aircraft looks awesome; but I'll probably never find that out.

Sorry but i join the NO installer group too.. POsky tried it with their repaints once and it wreaked havoc on the unsuspecting. Im quite glad that this thread gave me a heads up on what to expect because I would be rightly ###### if the uninstaller removed my Eric Marciano panel that i installed to run on my posky A330's and ifdg A320's. I also agree with the logic about learning to install the manual way. A person might not know how to install something but if they REALLY WANT IT.. they Will ... ESPECIALLY if they read the "How to install" file that USUALLY comes with the addons in any case.my 2 cents

I am one that installs the self-installing .exe's into a seperate folder and then copy the relavent parts into the correct FS9 folders. I would also do the same with this A330, however, I cannot even get this to unzip....it comes up as an unrecognised format. I have tried both the 200 and 300 variants with the same error.Using Win 2000 I don't have the standard ME and XP unzipping system, and so have both Win Ace, and Win RAR to take care of all unzipping requirements; they've never failed me yet with standard Win Zip formats.....is there something different about the compression used for these aircraft?Cheers....

Regarding general FS installers ....... I tend to avoid them. They add loads of unwanted crud to the registry, and sometimes overwrite existing uninstall.exe files ...... that really messes up the system :-boomI'm not maligning Flightcraft - the aircraft looks very accurate :). I try to install addons onto a secondary computer if possible, and transfer them onto my "good" PC using a USB disk ... ;)

Hi Peter, The fact is that the FC installer only READs registry entries to find out where the FS2004 is installed! So that

Well, I dont want to keep this discussion going on forever. It's like apples and oranges!Of course the installer ads a reg entry about where it install the product, otherwise it wouldnt know where to remove it from...But being so afraid of reg entries that does no harm, actually it just makes sure that you can remove it again, beats me. Why not care about the reg entries that get installed without your knowledge, not the ones you choose to (by installing ex. FC or any other program).Bottom line is, that 4300 people downloaded the preview version so far, and in this thread we have 10-12 people who for some reason hate installers. That doesnt add up for the 4288 that installs the product and have no problems with installers.It's fine with me that you guys have your routines with installing into temps and so on, just dont release any zipped versions, because you dont agree with us on the installers.Final version will be released as an installer as well. Because from our point of view as developers of the plane it makes much more sense to have installers in terms of support and so on, please respect that.ThanksPeter FlightCraft

Hi Peter,I don't think anyone has disrespected you on this issue, its your addon, and you are free to package it in anyway you see fit, I for one am very glad that you are releasing it, self installer or not.However, this does not alter the fact that some self installers are bad, as I said previously, the ones that overwrite existing unistall.exe's are a total pain, as you can end up with 10 or so programs in your add/remove programs list that all point to the same uninstall.exe which creates a right mess.From my point of view self-installers are unnessecary, the reason for this is that most (all?) people have there flight sim folder called the same,and to make a zip file that you have to point into the main FS folder which places all the files in the correct place is easier, this also helps as the zip program will inform you if you are going to overwrite any files, which a self-installer won't do.Still as long as we can "install" to a temp folder it won't worry me that much.I also don't think anyone said they were going to release there "own" zipped versions.Anyway many thanks for the Airbus'sDan.

one reason y we denied a zip file is that we are working on an installer which will make it available to place the required notes in the aircraft.cfg. so u dont need to place it in there seperatly..but when u install it to a temp folder it is going to install a .txt file in which the neccessary entry will be published..best regardsSascha jelackFlightCraft CEO