Ok... Jeroen... then to you it is acceptable for me to release a new panels.dll file that changes the base behavior of the sim and makes any other gauge product already out there unuseable?  I believe that's your stance based on your post above.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

1) Your analogy is extreme. The current modified lookup table they use has almost no adverse affects on the vast majority of scenery. There's been issues with one scenery so far that has some custom autogen. Addon airports, landclass products, photoscenery addons, mesh products, etc. appear to have no problems with it.

 

2) If you as a developer were willing to edit your modified file to ensure other products work as Orbx is doing, then yes, I'd be ok with it if it means pushing this sim forward into new boundaries.

 

3) At the end of the day people can simply choose to not use a product if it adversly affects some other addon they like. There's never been a gaurantee that all addons must work perfectly together.

Can you imagine if A2A started saying things like this against Realair? No me neither. Lol.

 

 

if Realair totally hijacks FSX and they become the key holder in how FSX now operates and other addon vendors have to go through Reaair and follow not FSX SDKs but Realair SDK  (no matter how many here think Realair aircrafts are the most amazing thing since sliced bread)  and now onward only their aircrafts works and once you install Realair  files, short of a full reinstall of FSX (which most folks would not do particulalry when they were not warned about in the first place), you better believe it, Other aircraft vendors and not just A2A  would be p!ssed..

My analogy is not extreme... it is exactly the same concept.  Changing the core behavior of the sim itself to further my own commercial agenda in such a manner as to cause problems for other products be they freeware or payware.

 

OrbX is not the 'standard' for FS... Microsoft is.  They developed and released the SDK that declares the boundaries for compliance.  Any changes to the boundaries by a third-party without public disclosure is an unacceptable business practice.

 

Also, providing the information necessary for other third-parties to work with the modifications made by OrbX is the correct approach... not demanding that third-parties provide OrbX with their product data.

Man, looks like Majestic is in the same boat. First they force us to buy their product, even after letting us know how the FDE works, and then look, it does not work with other addons because of this.....shame on them. Can believe I got forced into buying that.....

Man, looks like Majestic is in the same boat. First they force us to buy their product, even after letting us know how the FDE works, and then look, it does not work with other addons because of this.....shame on them. Can believe I got forced into buying that.....

That... well, makes no sense.  Might want to re-read your post as it really has no bearing on this discussion at all.  :wink:

3) At the end of the day people can simply choose to not use a product if it adversly affects some other addon they like. There's never been a gaurantee that all addons must work perfectly together.

 

That would be true if there was a full disclosure in the beginning BEFORE the install.. not after someone else has to point out at the cost of looking like a sore loser.

That would be true if there was a full disclosure in the beginning BEFORE the install.. not after someone else has to point out at the cost of looking like a sore loser.

Exactly.

My analogy is not extreme... it is exactly the same concept. Changing the core behavior of the sim itself to further my own commercial agenda in such a manner as to cause problems for other products be they freeware or payware.

 

OrbX is not the 'standard' for FS... Microsoft is. They developed and released the SDK that declares the boundaries for compliance. Any changes to the boundaries by a third-party without public disclosure is an unacceptable business practice.

 

Also, providing the information necessary for other third-parties to work with the modifications made by OrbX is the correct approach... not demanding that third-parties provide OrbX with their product data.

It is extreme because it assumes everything is broken by their change. In reality it's not and incompatible products are scarse and easily fixed.

 

And how is Orbx offering to do the work for other developers to ensure they work a worse approach then asking them to develop around them by giving them the information? The latter is more overbearing to me. There's nothing to even develop. It's just a matter of adding some calls to the lookup table. Orbx doesn't need anything else.

 

MS's standard is 7 years old with vast limitations. If you don't want that changed then don't use Orbx products.

 

They've been open from day one that the lookup table is modified and that they will have to add some other addons to it to make it all work right.

 

It was never some grand secret or conspiracy. I read about on their forums and in their press releases for months before Global came out.

It is extreme because it assumes everything is broken by their change. In reality it's not and incompatible products are scarse and easily fixed.

 

And how is Orbx offering to do the work for other developers a worse approach the asking them to develop around them by giving them the information? There's nothing to even develop. It's just a matter of adding some calls to the lookup table.

 

MS's standard is 7 years old with vast limitations. If you don't want that changed then don't use Orbx products.

 

They've been open from day one that the lookup table is modified and that they will have to add some other addons to it to make it all work right.

 

It was never some grand secret or conspiracy. I read about on their forums and in their press releases for months before Global came out.

 

Good points well made...

That would be true if there was a full disclosure in the beginning BEFORE the install.. not after someone else has to point out at the cost of looking like a sore loser.

There was full disclosure on their forums for months leading up to the release.

 

When the uninstaller comes out put it to use if that wasn't enough.

To be honest, none of this really makes sense.

How many people who are so against this, or with this argument actually own FTXG....and also, just so I may understand, where are all these strong feelings coming from. I would understand if people are actually invested in this to the point that they actually do have addons that are broke now, but from all I read, I don't see any reports of "orbx broke my......".

 

All I really see, if just some whining crying and complaining from people in different camps, looking across the field at each other, shouting at how right they are, and how wrong the other is.

 

It is kinda crazy if we actually step back, and look at it from the view point that nobody has to buy the first addon for FSX, let alone what Orbx has to offer.

To be honest, none of this really makes sense.

How many people who are so against this, or with this argument actually own FTXG....and also, just so I may understand, where are all these strong feelings coming from. I would understand if people are actually invested in this to the point that they actually do have addons that are broke now, but from all I read, I don't see any reports of "orbx broke my......".

 

All I really see, if just some whining crying and complaining from people in different camps, looking across the field at each other, shouting at how right they are, and how wrong the other is.

 

It is kinda crazy if we actually step back, and look at it from the view point that nobody has to buy the first addon for FSX, let alone what Orbx has to offer.

:good:

There was full disclosure on their forums for months leading up to the release.

 

When the uninstaller comes out put it to use if that wasn't enough.

 

That was the point Nick was trying to make...some standard FSX files are gone...  giving us uninstaller later (unless they package those FSX files), it would not be possible.

 

Although I like Orbx and they are doing some amazing stuff... 

 

I AM NOT WILLING TO HAND OVER FSX TO ONE SINGLE VENDOR! PERIOD! I find it ridiculous so many here are willing to do that,.,.just cause they like Orbx scenery. 

Bottom line, I haven't had any conflicts or untoward effects from FTXG. If I try to install something down the line (PMDG's 777, perhaps) and I get a message saying "Installation Failure: FTX Global has destroyed everything," I'll care. Until then, I couldn't care less about what Orbx supposedly broke. I think everyone should take pause and consider that NickN has motivations here that extend WELL BEYOND serving our best interests.

Bottom line, I haven't had any conflicts or untoward effects from FTXG. If I try to install something down the line (PMDG's 777, perhaps) and I get a message saying "Installation Failure: FTX Global has destroyed everything," I'll care. Until then, I couldn't care less about what Orbx supposedly broke

 

Right..and the rest of us feel reassured by your "I don;t care" thingi. Sheesh!

I didn't say much earlier.. but I spent some thoughts on this, cause I didn't get the full impact of this earlier.  

 

This issue seems to be a bigger issue of who manages and controls FSX.  Orbx would have to provide a reasonable out to clean out and remove their installs. There is no way out of this.  It is in the interest of all the flight sim community we request/demand Orbx do this for us.

 

I find it offensive and totally dissappoint with the large section of the fsim community  how they are willing to throw FSX over to Orbx and  hand it over to them..because they think Orbx scenrieris are cool.

 

On the other hand if Orbx did this unintentionally or it was just an honest mistake or Nick was plain wrong in his assertions, then All this discussion is moot.  But Orbx has an obligation to clear this up.