If a companies products are not what they are expected to be, the sensible money, having already waited to see what the early adopters think, goes elsewhere. A companies reputation is tremendously important in FS so I can understand why some comments might be removed but that sort of tactic only works for so long before the reputation is damaged and sales start to suffer. The only way to stay in business in FS is to offer a product of good or higher quality. If you don't, others will.

I didn't know Carenado had no support system or an ineffective one because I've never needed it for the purchases I've carefully made but it does say something about them and is I think good to know. Also good to know about the facebook comments as both taken together are instructive concerning their evident business practice so this is a worthwhile thread in my opinion. Good support systems are an essential in the FS marketplace so this is surprising tbh.

Hi Craig,

 

Not that big of a deal (since it was directed at me) as far as I'm concerned, I know my level of education and I also know the reason (small keyboard) for the typos. But I guess when your argument is weak, people will tend to deflect.

 

I find it refreshing to find someone here at AVSIM (reminds me of when AVSIM was new and fresh, great community back then) who will take the time out of their day to defend a fellow simmer over nonsense.  For that I thank you.

 

To show my appreciation Craig, if you ever find yourself in the Boca Raton, Fl. area I’d like you to stop by and spend the day in my Flight Deck Solutions Boeing 737NG simulator.

 

I think you'll enjoy yourself, unless you already have one.     : http://www.flightdecksolutions.com/pcupload/B737-FBPT.swf

 

If and/or when you decide to join me, just send me a PM and we can work out the details.

 

Thanks Craig

 

It is commercial, not commerical, and it is business not bisiness.

 

Come one Ed, you're better than that.   

Hi,

 

As a commerical developer I can see why you would want that to go missing. So he thinks it's ugly, so what... It's not like he is cursing out the company and or owners/developers. If your skin isn't thick enough to handle it's ugly... You're in the wrong bisiness.

Above is the original post you made. You called me out regarding another person's comments about some other developer's product being ugly. I agreed with the moderator that the post was inappropriate in a support forum. It served no purpose except to 'stir the nest'. A support forum is not the place for that. It makes no sense that you went after me regarding the removal of that post in another developer's support forum. I didn't remove it, it's not my forum. I simply agreed it didn't belong and wasn't appropriate.

 

PMDG has total control in their support forum and everyone accepts that. Inappropriate posts are removed. Why is it that when the same is done in other developer support forums then it becomes an issue?

 

As for the thick skin comment... my skin is far thicker than you think... but you might want to work on yours. This is the internet, and people say things that can offend you all the time... like correcting your spelling. :wink:

Let's end this there boys, nobody is winning here

Hi Ed,

 

I was going to let this go, but since you insist on continuing… Lets take a look at where this was posted, was it not in the Official and Unofficial support form here at AVSIM?.

 

Lets break it down, shall we.

 

1. Question from Blahhhblahhh: hum…. I just bought it, is it a beta version?

2. Answer from n4gix: No, technically it is still an Alpha version, as it is not yet "feature complete". Following that event, then serious "Beta testing" will occur...

3. Question from Blahhhblahhh: is this plane ready for p3d 2.5? because it's so ugly...

 

Sounds like support questions to me and his suspicions are confirmed by n4gix… The product is NOT ready for prime time, its still in Alpha. So, I take his question of it's so ugly as a support question, since this product is in ALPHA, will the ugly textures be fixed when this aircraft is out of ALPHA/BETA.

 

Since you reference PMDG in your post, I noticed AVSIM lists PMDG as "The PMDG Support Forum", whereas AVSIM lists Carenado as "The Unofficial Carenado Support Forum".

 

As for it's "some other developer's product", in this small niche environment commercial developers need to stick up for one another. Hence, the “As a commercial developer I can see why you would want that to go missing”. I would also expect Carenado to stick up for your products as well.

 

Sorry for any typos Ed, I'm on my iphone again... Small keypad.

It's also the same problem here.

A few days ago I tried to make some complains about a Milviz product on Avsim forum. A Milviz commercial member who is also a moderator (this is the problem) remove all my posts. They contact me by email and refund me for this product... nice...

 

LMAO       

 

No soup for you !! A Seinfeld classic LOL. The H850XP is a pretty nice jet, but lacking proper documentation, getting it to work properly feels like you're actually hacking the jet lol

 

 

AVSIM lists Carenado as "The Unofficial Carenado Support Forum".

While that statement is true... the post you keep wanting to fight about is in the MilViz support forum. A 'horse of a different color' as it's titled "The MILVIZ Support Forum" and is indeed controlled/moderated by MILVIZ.

 

Now... you were saying?

 

Oh... and I don't stick up for other developers any more than I stick up for end users. If someone's wrong... they're wrong. Doesn't matter to me which side of this 'fence' they're on.

Hi Ed,

 

So what about the original questions; they look like support questions to me, although they could have been phrased better. But then again, English may not be this persons native language.

 

1. Question from Blahhhblahhh: hum…. I just bought it, is it a beta version?

2. Answer from n4gix: No, technically it is still an Alpha version, as it is not yet "feature complete". Following that event, then serious "Beta testing" will occur...

3. Question from Blahhhblahhh: is this plane ready for p3d 2.5? because it's so ugly...

Edited May 12, 201511 yr by n4gix
Removed reference to inappropriate comment of ajpongress

Hi Ed,

 

So what about the original questions; they look like support questions to me, although they could have been phrased better. But then again, English may not be this persons native language.

From the MilViz website:

 

Important: This product is in Early Access status. This means that is not yet finished and may be incomplete in features and/or functionality.

 

Purchasers will receive access to the development builds as they are completed, and will receive the fully finished product upon release. Please note that although development builds are released regularly, there is no set schedule for their release. Purchase entitles you to the current development build, but does not guarantee the timing of, completion date, or feature status of future builds.

 

Purchasers are not required to actually test or file reports on the product but, if you should wish to do so, you may use the support forums for that purpose. Bug reports will be accepted (and are very welcome!); requests for changes based upon personal preferences will not be accepted.

 

We thank all early purchasers for their loyalty. This program enables us to offer a more refined final product while offering users the ability to enjoy the product early!

That's at the top of the product page. Does it even remotely suggest this is anything but an unfinished and untested product at the time of purchase?

 

Also from the same page, right below the HUGE warning about it being an unfinished product:

 

We are very excited to bring to you our King Air 350i, with versions for both FSX and P3Dv2!

Looks like it works with Prepar3D.

 

The guy states he just purchased... yet he didn't read the HUGE warning text and the first line after that? Seriously... that's not a support issue. As PMDG would state: Go read the manual... or webpage in this instance.

 

And yes... this is an adult conversation. I can disagree with someone without being a juvenile.

Hi Ed,

 

I get (most) people not reading web pages, manuals and/or not following instructions and what not... Just look at all the conversations here at AVSIM where answers are clearly shown. However, the post in question should not of been hidden, he should of been (as you point out using PMDG as an example) directed to the aircraft web page and or told to read the enclosed docs.

 

One of the reasons I will NEVER purchase an Alpha and/or Beta release software, when it's ready for prime time, then I will purchase.

I have no problem with a company maintaining their own Facebook page. It's advertising. Further, look at it this way: if I was an unscrupulous business owner, what would stop me from making a bunch of sock-puppet accounts and spending my time posting groundless lies etc on my competitors' pages, then indignantly shouting 'censorship!!\' when they delete them? 

 

It's their Facebook page, they can maintain it as they wish. I don't go to a company's Facebook page for objective reviews of the products. I'm looking for new product info, updates, news of any promotions/discounts etc. 

 

There may be reasons to be upset with Carenado. This ain't one of 'em.

 

Incidentally, I believe research has shown that having a few negative reviews isn't necessarily bad for sales. At the very least, it's been shown that it's better to have a few negative reviews than to have no reviews at all...

Talk about usless to the conversation, with an immature comment like that:

So I guess you just want to lash out at anyone that quotes you in this thread Michael?

Looking at the two of you go back and forth, I'm not sure you can call my extremely mild comment "immature" while standing on both feet.

But just like you two pick apart what each other types, you want to pick out a few words of what I wrote and ignore the overall intent.

 

So with that, you can continue your "mature discussion" and I'll bow out of this thread. Have fun.

Already enough drama here. Grow up.

However, the post in question should not of been hidden

No... the post should have been deleted instead of hidden. They were rude and are not defensible.

 

In my opinion... if you want to come into my 'house' and insult my work... you're going to be shown the 'door'. If you have a support problem... you can proceed in a respectful manner. If you don't, you won't get any support. That's neither unfair nor unrealistic an expectation.

Hi Ed,

 

Guess as a user and not a developer I see things differently. Once again, I guess we will have to agree to disagree as we have done in the past. Always interesting Ed, with that have a great day.

(...) my extremely mild comment (...)

 

 

Not sure what a less "mild" comment of yours would sound like?!?

 

You clearly missed your chance to apologize for your inappropriate post.