Hi,Now, I don't want to start the whole payware vs freeware row up again, BUT, heres the thing.In the last few weeks we have been treated to some exceptional freeware, real top quality stuff, and very complete packages.These packages are becoming increasing well and professionally put together, take the documentation supplied with both the Chippie and the Galeb, real high quality stuff, in fact the quality of this documentation puts many payware products to shame.The main reason I buy payware is the completeness of the package, but with freeware authours giving us this complete quality what reason is there to get payware?What can the payware boys offer us now that we can't already get from these free packages?, I mean the Galeb offers items that NO other package, pay or free, offers.I am truly, truly thankfull for this seeming new renaissance in freeware, and I applaud all the freeware authours for pushing the boundaries, and I certainly can't wait to see what the payware boys can offer to compete.The bar is being raised every week, by freeware ;).CheersDan.

As far as I can tell it's always been that way.As long as you have dedicated and talented people with the right tools and no budgetary or time constraints, you will continue to see magnificent, free contributions to the FS community that often equal or surpass payware.Andrew

Nothing is different from what it has always been.If anything the innovation in freeware releases is overall LESS than in the past as many people skip the freeware market and start out as commercial ventures because they simply can't afford the time and effort without a return on investment.Sure there are the occasional gems, but the vast majority of freeware releases (far far more so than in the past) consists of AFCAD files and repaints of AI aircraft created by others.There's one or two scenery packages a WEEK being released and a similar number of new aircraft (at most) on average.2 years ago there were more each day and they were of similar quality (remember the capabilities of the sim back then were less so the best people could do was less as well).As to what commercial groups can offer that no freeware author does:- complete integrated flight control systems. (FMS, custom GPS units, custom autopilots, etc. etc.)- far better FDEs (possibly in cooperation with the aircraft manufacturer themselves)- higher accuracy (they often have access to more detailed data about the real thing)etc. etc.Remember also that there's a lot of hotheads out there.Many people are afraid to offer any public criticism of freeware at all because of the flames.At the same time authors are swamped with angry emails containing abusive language and threats to their persons.This attitude means that there is little motivation for them to go on and they don't get valuable feedback on how to improve.

I don't necessarily agree with the notion that theres been a large number of freeware releases that "equal or surpass" the quality of (the best) payware. Don't get me wrong now, theres definitely some absolutely gobsmacking freeware out there and I'm grateful and humbled by the work that goes into those projects. However, I don't think any freeware I've found (and I've got pretty much all of the top stuff) is up there with the likes of the F1 Meridian, the DF Archer, RealAir's SF260 and such. It's fairly common to claim about a good freeware release that it's "payware quality" and theres nothing wrong with that becuase the authors deserve all the credit they get, but in my experience, and as good as the best freeware is, I really find the comment to be a (slight) exageration in most cases. Some of the best freeware definitely comes very close (which is an amazing achievment really given the limited resources the freeware developers have at hand), but imho theres still a level of completness, integration and functionality in the best payware planes I have that hasn't quite been matched by any freeware...

<<>>Oh no, Dan? Yeah, right, LOL.I agree with others that good freeware has always competed on a level with the best of the payware; it's just all the more incredible that the freeware authors can still produce such a high level of quality for FS2004 when the effort involved has become so great owing to the complexity of the models and high expectations of the market. It's rare to see quality freeware produced by a single author now, for obvious reasons; it all just takes too long to do, and requires varying expert skill sets.And as for those who say nothing can ever match payware quality, I just don't hold with that. Refer to other threads for all the reasons: we don't need to repeat this every week! The old FMC chestnut comes up every time in these threads, and I won't start to argue that one as in my Tristars I use INS anyway! But there is little else I have found that gives many payware products any real edge over freeware; certainly, given their considerably higher cost! Those of us who don't fly Boeing and Airbus all day are more than happy.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/newlogo.jpg

It interesting people say it has always been the same, maybe I just have not seen it before.But I just feel the quality of the package as a whole has gotten to be on a par with some payware releases.Take the Galeb for example, I don't think there is a payware plane in its ilk that comes anywhere near it, Similaly the Chippie. In all the freeware packages I used to get, I always felt that there was something missing that the payware packages have, be it a 2D panel, a VC, a custom soundset, good documentation, etc etc, but now the packages are as complete as any thing you have to buy.Maybe its just my perception of the whole thingDan.

The difference between payware and freeware consists of one thing: the former requires the customer to pay, the latter does not. That's it. And there's nothing wrong with either perspective. If a developer wants to produce an awesome aircraft, and yet for whatever reason does not want to be paid, more power to him. If a developer wants to produce an awesome aircraft and wishes to be compensated for his time, more power to him too.It doesn't really say anything about quality. I think that's not the job description of the term 'payware' or 'freeware'. Yes, normally, we assume payware to be 'better' than freeware because the developer can afford to spend more/full time on the product, but sometimes we are surprised by the quality of freeware. That's probably not a surprise, if we think about it more; people who work for free often produces fantastic work, and not only in the realm of flightsim products (Linux/opensource community, for e.g.)I now only fly 2 aircraft; the freeware Fanda Dash 8, and the payware Aeroworx B200; who cares whether they're payware or freeway, those terms are just dummy variables. And it's quite meaningless to say that the Fanda is 'catching up' with the Aeroworx since there's really no such thing. Both of them are awesome in their own right! :)

My personal theory on the economics of payware vs freeware is that the quality of freeware creates payware. AND...drives the cost of payware up. The competitive quality of freeware is now such that if an author puts in that level of effort, he is tempted and mostly deserves to be compensated for the effort because of the time and talent necessary to create that level of quality. The cost to serve that level of product, also then must take into account the cost to publish and distribute by web or by CD, sell using credit cards, support and other cost loads not associated with freeware. The very successful payware projects also mean paying publishers, creating corporations and or tax vehicles to deal with the revenue, etc. I think that cost burden is why we still enjoy great freeware mainly. A lot of folks (me included) just dont want to deal with that hassle. In some categories, I think we are getting to market saturation though. To be honest, how many DC-3's and 737's do you need? Also how many airbuses? The ability to find something unique I think is where freeware really pushes the payware folks. I love this new Soko Galeb simply because its a plane mostly unknown in the west and the authors not only implemented many top quality details but they also were creative in new ways. I bet that we'll now see "ejection systems" in other military airplanes. Thats new ground. I love it when freeware pushes the creativity envelope. It raises the bar yet again and compells the payware folks to deliver increased value.Eric

Personally I'd be willing to PAY good CASH for Stellan Hillmersby's DC-9Espen O's awesome Fokker 50Oleksiy Frolov's Dash 8the OMwings L1011not to mention those I have neglected to name.I fly the DC-9 at least every other flight ... after all the great payware glass and FMC's (not that I don't LOVE them also) there really isn't much to compare to the DC-9 for a nice medium short haul jet or the Dash or Fokker for regional hops ... But isn't that why we all like this hobby? There something for everyone ... some people love to develop gauges and panels, some people like to do models, some people like to do textures and liveries and scenery and afcad, some love to tweak FDE's ..... some for free ... some people try to feed their families by doing some or all of the above ... I personally say THANKS TO ALL OF THEM .. for making my hobby such an interesting one!!! I wish I had the talent to do these things, but I certainly love to fly all these great people's software!!!!CheersPaul BenoitKBOS, soon to be KSAN

IMO there are certainly some very good freeware aircraft available that matches the quality of most payware - e.g.: Maule, several Aero Commanders, Howard 500 (don't remember the authors right now).Remember that an FS2004 plane is much more complex than an FS2000 or FS98 plane which is probably why more and more developers are going payware. Thanks to increased computing power, planes now feature more detailed textures and models, virtual cockpits, better flight models and so on which also means they take longer to create.