FSUIPC and blocking posts

[Guest JDiaz]

I'm gonna make this very to the point and whoever has an issue with it can go live in North Korea where free speech is shunned upon. I've posted many many times in this forum and I do not have a history of being disruptive and I'm very supportive of this community and the great things that go on in it and I am not anti payware, go into the PMDG forum to see my support there.I was reading the announcement about (big shock) FSUIPC going payware. It's funny and accurate how someone in there posted that this hobby is becoming more expensive then golf, because it is. People post about someone putting in all these hours to develop a program and expect it to be free...well I hate to break it to people but the definition of a HOBBY is something someone does on their FREE time because they WANT to and ENJOY it. If you want to put food on your table you get a JOB!!! It is becoming ever increasingly clear that everytime something gets popular in this community someone wants to make a buck off of it.No one is holding a gun to Pete's head to produce FSUIPC and the reason we get charged 25 bucks for it is because people sit there and say "Hey I'm 100% behind you why don't you charge 80 while you're at it!"What made this community so great was that people did things out of love and passion and not to make an easy dollar or euro or peso.On my last note it kinda upsets me when I see one person disagree with wanting to pay for the program and someone goes in there and demands the post be locked. Why? Does it bother you that someone isn't a mindless robot willing and able to stand in line and pay for anything and everything like it's a drug habit? More expensive then a drug habit in fact. Is it so wrong that someone not agree with someone's decision or policy? That's an even scarier thought then all of FS becoming payware, the day someone can't speak their mind. That person did not insult anyone or use any bad language they simply made a good point.I'm not against something being payware, I'm against someone making something as a freeware hobby for so long then suddenly decide to charge for it because they feel they can make some cash on it knowing people will pay for it blindly.Let's hope there's light at the end of this ever darker tunnel

[Guest Daniel Pimentel]

I agree, Jason. Problem with Pete is not that he's going pay, but that he decided to do so right now, when so many add-ons depend on it. And it's not about paying blindly, but what choice do you have? Basically looks like Pete's doing this because he knows the community is dependent on it, kind of like drug dealers do. Give free doses, get the guy hooked, then charge what you will for it, he'll HAVE to buy it. And for those "You don't have to buy it if you want" people, what's the choice, flying FS right out of the box? No thank you. But I think it's really unfair that all of a sudden we have to pay for a tool as essential as FSUIPC.Daniel P.

[wvernonc 0]

You know, Pete has done a wonderfull job on his programs for years. How ungratefull can you be. These programs are getting progressively harder to make and take hundreds of hours. I feel it is time to re-imburse Pete for his work. I feel the price is modest. He couuld find another hobby to support. Then you would all gripe that 'He just let us down and quit!' You all should be thanking him for the free years instead of the upcomming pay years. You could have been paying for the last years! Thank you Pete for your work!

[Guest Aidi]

I will jump in at this point. Yes i know this post is still new, but it will expand. There will be a great deal of views on the recent annoucement of Pete deciding to charge for his FSUIPC module. All I ask of you is that when you post here with your views you:1. Keep it perspective to the subject in question2. Keep it civil Tempers can easily flare... so think before you type.RgdsAidihttp://www.vfr-flightcenter.com/avsim_sig.jpg

[Guest JDiaz]

First of all you don't know me so don't call me ungrateful, let's get that straight. Second of all I never said certain products should not be payware let's get THAT straight. Third of all my gripe is that this is a HOBBY that was done out of LOVE not to pay your bills. And NO we should not have been paying for something that was freeware all along. If it's becoming such a pain to do it then pass the torch to someone who's willing to take over and trust me eventually someone will come along who learns the code and does it for free. For you to sit here and accuse people of being ungrateful or cheap is a typical ploy and argument and a very tiring cliche one at that. So before you go calling people names remember that this post was made to have a civil discussion about payware and paying for products not to be calling people names, that's uncalled for and destroys the point of my post.P.S. Than you Aidi for your post, appreciate it.

[Guest Daniel Pimentel]

Aidi:Understood. If it gets hairy I'll pull out. lolDaniel Pimentel

[Guest Daniel Pimentel]

Agreed. It's funny how people try to shut you up when you're just voicing your opinion.Daniel P.

[Guest imemyself]

What made this community so great was that people did things out of love and passion and not to make an easy dollar or euro or peso.

HOBBY that was done out of LOVE not to pay your bills

I agree 110%, you couldn't have said it better.

[Guest]

Hi Jason,I agree with much of what you are saying. I think one of the issues with FSUIPC is that for some time now a number of payware folks have been using Pete's work without paying any royalties of any kind. So many programs now depend on FSUIPC, and without it, their programs would be so many electrons on someone's desktop rather than doing the things they do on our computers. I can see his point for that one, even though it's only been stated in a very subtle manner.There certainly is a strong trend in FS to go payware, and that seems a shame to me. There is a considerable amount of payware out there that really doesn't live up to its billing, and quite a considerable amount of freeware that goes way above and beyond the call of duty (Dash 7 - Shupe, 727 panel - Probst, etc. in the latter category). I think that perhaps one of the things this is serving to do for me, is to make FS that much more in line with the beat-up old saying, "as real as it gets". I now get very selective about what aircraft I add on, and as I'd rather go to enhanced airports, I am much more selective in where I go as well (is the scenery good enough to buy if it is payware, then I'll buy it and go there). That's much more realistic than downloading "everything that moves", and in some warped sort of way, I don't mind that. A case in point is I've always loved the 210, and Carenado's certainly looks good from the screenies. As in RL, I'll look it over very carefully before buying though. One thing I do really hate is when I pay for something and it turns out to be of substandard quality. So, I'll "shop" much more carefully than if the product were free. I'm afraid payware is here to stay, at least for a time. Poor service and/or quality will eventually weed out the bad ones (that's the huge benefit of these forums, and kudos to AVSIM, Flightsim.com, FSNordic, etc for providing them). Until then though, it is caveat emptor, unfortunately.As for people who can't seem to handle anyone disagreeing with their point of view, well I totally quit posting on any forums (save for one really good one) for a year or so because of just that. Unfortunately there is a mentality among a few that if someone doesn't agree with their personal viewpoints, the disagreer is worthy of being taken out and shot, or at the very least, heavily flamed. I suppose that is a sign of immaturity? I don't know (being perfect myself, it's hard for me to understand things like that :-hah!!). Seriously, it is a shame because it undermines the great things these forums do for a good number of people. The "problem-people" are small in number, as the vast majority of folks here are the best you'll find anywhere in any hobby. It only takes a few to wreck it though. If the person is respectful and states their viewpoints in an honest fashion and sticks to the issues (i.e. doesn't make it personal), then no one has any stand to take them down for it. Too bad it doesn't work that way all the time, but I guess (you know what) happens.Good post Jason, thank - and by the way - you do some pretty terrific work yourself :-). I've seen some of your repaints - they're great.Glenn

[Guest metamarty]

Agreed 100%I spent countless late night hours on software like fsgame/unaaf/aafplus/aedit/msl/fmc's/squawkbox server. I did that, and I will continue to do that because it's fun and I want to support this community. I have a job to pay my bills and I'll put my hobby time into my hobby. My software will always be free.Marty

[Guest JDiaz]

Glad others agree. I'm not putting Pete or his work down his FSUIPC program has made so many things possible. In my opinion payware developers should not be getting a free ride from Pete on his program if anything Pete should charge PAYWARE developers for use of his program and leave the freeware community free and/or donations. I think to charge people across the board is harsh and defeats the original intention of his program. So I agree with others here payware should be paying for us of FSUIPC, maybe have a version of it that's simply for developer use that developers need to purhcase in order to make their product compatible. Some will argue that he's gonna have two versions with the the new program but the free part hardly is very functional.Anyways again my two cents, keep it civil guys, different opinions from my own are WELCOME, but making it personal is NOT.P.S. Thank you Glenn for the compliment, glad you like the repaints! Look out for some more soon!

[Guest metamarty]

I also think that payware developers shouldn't get a free ride with FSUIPC, but wat is happening now is a very difficult situation. Payware developers have counted on FSUIPC, while they could have created their own interface. Saying that a payware FSUIPC will not harm end users is simply not true. We know that payware developers are running a tight budget. I don't know what Pete charges to payware developers, but you can bet who's going to pay it. Already we see a slow but steady increase in payware price, and this is just going to add to the other excuses to lift prices.

[JSkorna 137]

It is my OPINION that many people are cheap.JimActiveSky Support

[ErnieAlston 33]

> I don't know what Pete charges to payware developers, but you can >bet who's going to pay it. Already we see a slow but steady >increase in payware price, and this is just going to add to the >other excuses to >lift prices.Whatever price it is, it still cheaper than what the developer would charge you if they had to develop their own IPC module to do the same job.You seriously don't expect a developer to incur extra development costs, and not be compensated for it in the purchase price ?The profit margins for many FS add-ons is pretty slim already.Regards.Ernie.

[jcboliveira 1]

There is only one problem that makes me disagree, all the freeware developers can ask for a free key. So I can't see what is the problem about FSUIPC going in to payware. I'm sure that you agree that the rest of FSUIPC like joystick calibration can go payware without any problem.Jos