>As freeware developers go payware, the only relationship that>matters is the business one. There is still a need for>politeness on both sides, particularly as it can be hard for>each side to understand the other as Paul says, but addons are>getting more and more complex and so developers are having to>defend their decisions and actions because they understand the>coding limitations of working around a three year old product>and maybe the customer doesn't. At the same time the customer>has paid for a product and entered into a contract with the>developer, so `friendship` goes out the window. It's>business, not pleasure from the moment the developer>took the money. If the addon includes support, the customer is>entitled, whether they are nice or not.Allcott, please don't take this personally, as it is in no way an attack on you. I'm simply amazed that so many people still hold the belief that somehow with payware developers it's "just business". As if somehow, asking for compensation from a customer precludes the developer from caring whether or not the customer enjoys the addon. I can tell you that from my perspective nothing could be farther from the truth! I've been involved in payware projects as opposed to freeware most often lately because I'm self-employed and the primary breadwinner for my family. That means that the only way I can possibly set aside the time to work on my favorite FS projects is if I can wring some small amount of change out of them to offset the development time a little. That doesn't mean that I'm a hard-nosed businessman who is just out to make a buck. In fact, if I were such an individual, there are certainly many better ways to go about it than trying to wrestle some small drop of blood out of our niche market turnip!I very much want anyone who uses a product that I've been involved in to enjoy both the experience of that use, and that of dealing with support (and me, if they should require). From talks I've had with other developers, including some of the MSFS design team themselves, it's obvious that to a person, we all love flying the simulator. And it's that love of flying, both real and simulated, that drives us to want to add more features and refinements to our favorite sim.So yes, there have been some rather embarassing statements made by some payware authors over the years, and they sometimes haven't treated their customer base with as much respect as they should have. But I've been on the other end of it, and I can tell you that much the same can be said of the customers, too. We're all human, and since we're so passionate about our little virtual world, it's only normal that we might go a little overboard sometimes. Most of us snap out of it, get a little distance, and try to put things into perspective from time to time. It's an exercise I heartily recommend.thanks,

Another long time lurker chiming in....First off: a huge thanks to all of the developers hard at work out there. Since returning to FS after a hiatus, I've set myself up with UT+BEV, the ATR, the B200 and A36 (depends how much time I can carve out - I'd love to have the time to get to know the 737NG or the 767...). I'm constantly amazed at the experience that can be had, the depth of knowledge available to learn and the developer and community support available. Don't mean to get of on a tangent here, just been meaning to write in for a while.That said: I have to both agree and disagree with the following snippet a bit: >I'm not going to rush out and buy>a $3000.00 CAD program, even though I can afford it and it>would be cool to have, but simply because I don't know>anything about how to use it, nor do I care to invest the time>to learn how to use it. However, if I did buy it, I would>expect the seller to be patient, understanding and willing to>help me through even a rather mundane problem. I paid them, I>placed my trust in them.I do agree buyers must make an informed purchase, and the CAD analogy is a great example. Developers of complex add-ons must (and do, to a surprising extent, at least on the several add-ons I mention above) provide adequate documentation and a reasonable forum for new users to get up to speed. But: users cannot not expect to be spoon fed, and do need to retain responsibility to "do the homework". If one buys AutoCAD and expects to be hand-held by Autodesk, one will be sad, frustrated and poor. On the other hand, with some effort, there is more information and help to be found than can be imagined. I expect AutoDesk would say you paid to get a fully documented complex 3D software package capable of incredible things, expandability etc. which runs with reasonable stability and performance on a wide range of equipment, while being actively developed and improved, and they would be thrilled to teach you how to use it - for a fee.Consider the ATR. Great plane. Great manual. Great forum. Great tutorials. High complexity and fidelity. That complexity and fidelity is, for a geek like me, precisely the attraction. Spent a few frustrating nights having silly stuff happen ("how do you clear a disconnect?"), before I got it all together. Turns out it was my problem, the question had been asked 100 times, and I'd have been out of line to expect Hans to personally walk me through it (though I bet he would of, judging by the forum...)It's all a question of balance I think. Thanks to anyone who bothered to read this far!

Yes balancce. Much of the support in developers is provided free by other fellow users and I can see a point hiding away in this thread that their contribution is `freeware` and therefore ought to be treated with the same courtesy as we all agree should apply to freeware developers- even if the reply itself is brusque, blunt or even rude. But the other thread here got me thinking - despite the advice to read the manual you still had to have the relevant section posted? And thought that was some kind of entitlement? Why didn't you actually take the advice - and just read the thing! This is the bit I don't understand. I LOVE reading manuals. They often contain snippets of information you'd never discover for yourself or can explain simply (for idiots like me that means `with pictures` ) not only the HOW-to, but also the `why`. That makes the learning curve so much shorter, especially if you're dealing with unfamiliar, complicated aircraft. The ATR is a perfect example where there is NO alternative to reading the manuals, following the tutorials and LEARNING for yourself how to operate things correctly. This will only change when the developers realise that their customers dont like reading manuals, and start charging for the help desk. In my company we do. Scales of charges depending on the contract package the customer signed up to. Cheaper up front? More expensive to receive support. Premium phone lines or subscription only numbers. Almost all of which can be avoided if the customers actually read the 330 page manuals we ship. But hey! it's not our problem!In fact, an enterprising simmer could start a private helpdesk, charging a fee for reading the manual for those too lazy to do it for themselves and probably make a killing. Of course, the logical next step is for someone to come round and fly it for us, thus creating Flight Passenger 10, but allowing us to observe the lovely wing views the whole flight.But wouldn't that defeat the objective - simulating flight?Allcott

>Wonderful thread - thanks for all the discussion. >>Ian hit on a problem I see. A question is asked about a>product on the product's "Customer Support" forum. Forum>members not affiliated with the company respond with rude>tirades - actually insulting the person posting.>>I was told by one such person that I didn't have enough posts>yet to comment on rudeness.>>When I see this, I no longer purchase from that company. As>far as I'm concerned, the company's silence is tacit approval>of this type of abuse.>>I do agree that there are different relationships between>developers and users when it comes to payware versus freeware.> I see freeware as a gift from the developer. When I open a>gift a Christmas, I don't start complaining about it - I say>thank you and then use it or not - my choice. >>When I pay for a piece of software, I don't really care how>many silly questions the company has been asked. They are>required to answer mine politely and informatively as has been>mentioned above. If I am met with rudeness for asking what>some see as a silly question, I no longer patronize that>company. If I go to their Customer Support forum and see>numerous arrogant and rude replies to questions, I no longer>patronize that company. Simple really. >>Thanks again for the thread.>>Regards,>Paul>>Well said.

Because all six posts were overnight, Allcott. Rather like the developer, who was asleep (hopefully!) when I made the original post, I slept through the snotty replies. I got all six in my mailbox the next morning. As for expecting the reply to be posted, I didn't. He posted it of his own volition and got that post the next morning as well. I had already read the manual several times without finding the offending section because, basically, I was frustrated as heck and by that point wasn't reading thoroughly. Since then (2000 or 2001), fortunately, Adobe finally included the "search" function in Acrobat Reader as standard, so I wouldn't have the same problem now! ;-)Regarding the way that people should be treated, the maxim applies that you should always treat others as you should expect to be treated yourself. I personally provide support both face to face and over a telephone or the internet for a heck of a lot of people and always start by treating the person politely and professionally - regardless of whether it is part of my job or not. It's very hard to retain that with someone who is swearing, shouting and calling you offensive names because they have spent a lot of money on something and it doesn't do what they expected it to. Normally, yes, it does come down to user error, but that doesn't give me or anyone else the right to start calling them names and abusing them or vice versa. I've never sworn or shouted at a customer. It's happened to me regularly.Incidentally, I agree with you on the importance of reading manuals. I don't tend to start by reading them through from cover to cover, but will sit there with them open next to me and look things up as they happen - that's how I learn. Later on (usually during a cruise), I will read them properly and find out all the useful little tricks that I missed while I was looking for specific things. That said, though, with the many tens of pages (if not hundreds!) that are becoming the norm these days, it is becomingly increasingly easy to miss a line or two in the thousands as well. As I said above, that's what the search function is for... :-hahCheers,Ian P.