I don't want to be a wet blanket but after 7 pages of this endless, pointless debate, who really cares what caused the demise of Flight? It happened. I'm not real happy about it. But I don't think anyone outside of Microsoft will know what transpired. It's not going to change anything.

 

+1

 

Don't worry, this will be over soon... Flight post mortem.

To me, that doesn't sound right either. In fact, it's the main problem I have with X-Plane's marketing, as well as some of it's greatest admirers and addon developers. The word is, is that X-Plane is developed by serious engineers & pilots. So...........in addition to it's "outstanding" blade element theory for flight dynamics..........it's the ONLY sim that a "real" pilot would appreciate. And...........any real pilot should know the difference.

 

Personally I know better. I'm very aware that real pilots have also been involved in designing, programming, and owning many of the 3rd party addons companies for FS9 & FSX. I'm also aware, that real pilots were employed by Microsoft, for the design & programming of Microsoft's Flight Simulator program. In fact, as I was a beta tester, I knew that these people with pilot backgrounds were very enthusuastic about these projects.

 

Therefor, I get sick & tired, turned off, etc...............of seeing this marketing approach, in which X-Plane & only X-Plane, is portrayed as being the "serious" sim. Let's face it, Microsoft was the company that was capable of putting up serious cash for real life navigation, terrain & airport databases, before X-Plane could even think of it. And that's the reason, I'll easily go along with Microsoft's "Real as it gets" slogan, back when it was first published.

 

In the meantime, Flight Simulator isn't dead by any means (since it's still highly supported by outside developers). Once again, whenever this excuse is used by X-Plane developers, Austin (the X-Plane owner), or just users...................I shake my head in disbelieve, and get farther alienated.

 

L.Adamson

 

Larry,

 

I've never seen it written so well before. Thank you for putting what I always feel into words. It highly ticks me off when folks cop an attitude about XP superiority when clearly both sims have something unique to offer, and I wish that folks could get off their high horse on this issue.

 

Thanks once again.

Somehow today's cartoon can apply to the company in question!

http://www.dilbert.c...mic/2012-07-30/

This was an excellent cartoon! I particularly enjoyed this comment:

There is no need to run out of moronic ideas, also known as "business strategy." It has been shown statsistically (sic) that the half-life of a strategy (or moronic idea, if you prefer) is 1.5 years: 1.5 years to become established, 1.5 years to a mature to a peak, 1.5 years to deteriorate, and 1.5 years to be discarded. Thus, an organization needs a change in strategy every 4.5 to 6 years.

 

However, the ideas need NOT be new and original. Few employees, managers and officers stay beyond 10 to 15 years, which means there is no corporate memory of the moronic, eehhh.. strategic ideas that were utilized before then. The result is that most large organizations are in a loop consisting of the same three or four ideas, each in fashion for 4.5 to 6 years.

 

They never run out of moronic ideas. They just hit "replay."

I don't think anyone has said "It was successful but killed by corporate politics."

 

People have said it was unsuccessful, in part, due to corporate politics. That does happen to a lot of projects that otherwise might have done better, in large companies with many departments, who are internally viewed as competing against one another at the managerial level, although usually not at the production level.

Indeed there were quite likely many causes and not any single cause. It is fairly clear though that there was a great deal of internal confusion and fumbling taking place.

 

Read Tom Allensworth's comments with regards to the handling of the "paid advertising" that MS attempted to do here at AVSIM. MS had contracted out the work to a "professional PR firm" who then insisted on taking absolute control of AVSIM's front page...

 

...yeah, like that bird was ever going to fly!

 

Long story short, Flight got one weeks worth of free advertising, since AVSIM returned all their money and said "Thanks, but no thanks."

n4gix Quote> They never run out of moronic

ideas. They just hit "replay."<quote

 

Bill you and I must have worked at the same company :)

 

I have a draw full of old projects and when some young spark comes along with that 'bright idea' I could, if asked have told them that that idea has been done before. It worked because of X and if Y was in place and you have Z then it stands a chance. But because xy and z are no longer valid please do A to W and waste a couple of years. Of course, no one asked and after a couple of years of turmoil it all fails.

 

The amount of corporate history that is forgotten is proportional to the size of the company.

 

I believe that history is still a subject at school. It's just a shame it's forgotten in the workplace!

Indeed there were quite likely many causes and not any single cause. It is fairly clear though that there was a great deal of internal confusion and fumbling taking place.

 

Read Tom Allensworth's comments with regards to the handling of the "paid advertising" that MS attempted to do here at AVSIM. MS had contracted out the work to a "professional PR firm" who then insisted on taking absolute control of AVSIM's front page...

 

...yeah, like that bird was ever going to fly!

 

Long story short, Flight got one weeks worth of free advertising, since AVSIM returned all their money and said "Thanks, but no thanks."

 

From their own statements, it seemed that they were operating under some model that attempted to respond to data on the fly as to what the market wanted. There was much mention of how they were collecting numbers on actual user activity, and would calibrate their responses with that in mind. At the same time, the ad for a new manager stressed something to the effect that the candidate would be working in an environment where they would have to strongly defend their recommendations/decisions against other managers with competing agendas.

 

I remember grimacing as I read that ad. It sounded to me like a recipe for stress and confusion in 15 competing directions, while doing a barrel roll in a madhouse, and I wondered what sort of masochist would apply.

 

The reality could have been far different, but it sounded to me like something for sane people to stay away from. I remember somebody commenting that MVgibbage should apply, and I thought Ouch! God help him if he gets it!

defend their recommendations/decisions against other managers with competing agendas.

 

Hello

Well whatever kind of masochist he was it looks like the other agendas won.

You would have to be crazy or desperate to respond to a Job advert written like that.

Long story short, Flight got one weeks worth of free advertising, since AVSIM returned all their money and said "Thanks, but no thanks."

 

Marketing has ALWAYS been one of Microsoft's biggest failing points. So many opportunities lost, and the "webisodes" on Youtube were a joke that only validated people's hate for the product. I would never say it was marketing's fault for Flight failure, but they sure as hell didnt help its success.

Warning: some harsh language in this video

 

 

This made me lol :) :LMAO: ...maybe that's what it's like.

I wonder if Kixeye will be around in five years?

Well, that was different........ :P

 

Wonder if they got any takers?

Do we really believe that if Flight has made the money Microsoft hoped for it would have been abandoned?

 

Also, has no one noticed that Dilbert is a loser?

Warning: some harsh language in this video

 

The Interview

 

This made me lol :) :LMAO: ...maybe that's what it's like.

I wonder if Kixeye will be around in five years?

 

I don't know if Kixeye will be around in five years, but someone should send this video to the corporation in question, with several many CC & BCC's.

 

This made my day(Payback) :LMAO:

Do we really believe that if Flight has made the money Microsoft hoped for it would have been abandoned?

 

I don't recall anyone suggesting that.

My money is that in the next month or two we will hear there is a small staff of MSF whose function is to coordinate development of content by 3PDs for distribution throught Live and Stream. Almost zero downside for MS and a big potential upside.

I don't recall anyone suggesting that.

 

But someone did.

 

 

Nothing at all to do with the possiblity that neither were commercially viable?

 

Since MS never has and never will release any financial details on specific products, we cannot make any type of informed analysis. So no, I won't seriously entertain that as a proximate causal factor.

 

And Dilbert's still a loser,