>Now back to the MDMax, can anyone comment on the framerates?>>>MiltosWell, due to fact that it doesn't have a VC (or WC), it doesn't hit your FPS like many add on.Being personally and constantly in contact with the developer, I can assure you that, at "programming time", main aim was to release a FPS friendly product. The whole project has been wrote in pure C language, which is Window's core language, I have a PIV 2.4Ghz, 1Gb of RAM, ATI9800 Atlantis 256MB, and 2 (4 years dated extremely "lazy" HDs... should I buy new ones?) and I can say that it is running very good on my machine, meaning that this is really not a FPS killer.On the other hand, about the pricing issue, anyone should keep in mind that bypassing FS's internal limitations to add the brakes overheat effect or icing consequences, requires LOTS of additional programming knowledge and source code lines that goes far beyond the mere FS SDK released by MS. Even if you can't take "nice screenshots" of your brake's overheat or of your flight controls jammed by the ice, you can load your payload and fuel without NEVER open any FS windows, staying ALWAYS inside in the cockpit (there where a pilot is when he's not running after the flight assistants...) to check that a mistake in managing the cockpit and configuring the a/c will mostly have a consequence.At the moment the project is being constantly evolved, under refinement and constant testing.RegardsFrancesco

Hi Francesco,>> On the other hand, about the pricing issueI don't think that is an issue. If it's as good as Daniel describes, I wouldn't have a problem to pay 100 Euro or more for it. My PS1 CD has cost 200 Euro and I can install it when and where I want.It's the licensing policy what's an issue. I don't want to start one more discussion about such issues, just tell my opinion.All that copying problems, or more generally theft morality, is a big problem for all. No doubt about that and I understand some protection must be done. But if you e.g. look to the fair handling by Flight1, there the problem is equally shared on the shoulders of both publisher/developer and customer. There is still trust in the honestly paying customer.With the MDMAX procedure there is no trust at all, the problem is put on the shoulders of the customer alone.Payware companies might come and go. Look to LAGO, they do not respond to anything anymore. Imagine LAGO would have had such an activation procedure and you would get a new PC. You would be lost now.If you would look in the European forums, you would find I am not the only one who skips products because of that. And it's not only MDMAX, it also affects e.g. Cloud9 with a similar procedure.What's the point to make brilliant products with a lot of programming effort and then limit the number of customers with such a licensing ? That can't be in the intention of developers, I assume they are MD80 lovers themselves.If you are in contact with the developers then it's such issues about they should know. If MDMAX should ever release a box version with freely installable CD or changes their policy, I will surely go for it immediately.My Aerowinx 747 PS1 CD has cost 200 Euro. I have the Majesticsoftware Dash-8 Pro Version for 99 Euro. I can install both when and where I want. So it should be :)Mike

Mike,Why do you compare the flight1's protection method with this one?Every developer finds the best way to protect his product.In this case the activation procedure is completely automatic and done by the servers. I ve installed, uninstalled and reinstalled almost 20 times and I never had any problem during the activation.I accepted your objection very easily, as many of us.As I told you, I know the Team working on the MDMAX, that's why I do feel so relaxed about any issue concerning the protection.But of cos I can understand worries as you never talked or had the chance to meet any of them.I m very sure that the team never made a "marketing focused" policy.You can find directly on the site that if you don't like etc etc you shouldn't buy the MDMAX. So what developer tells you this? No one.I m very happy of F1'quality (who isn't???). Flight1 always sets a new standard in FS add on design and quality. But here we are talking about something completely different, trying to focus the user's attention on cockpit's procedures or on the a/c's systems, instead of pop up windows or how the protections sys works.An example? The cockpit is designed to be handy.In real life you wud easily find everything in one action: looking for the flaps? you put the hand on the lever. The same is in the MDMAX: you need the flaps? well you put the mouse on.Even the engine start up procedure is designed to recreate the actions made in real life: you need to hold the starter button, at max motoring you push the SO security button and move up the SO valve lever.The same is here: you need to hold the starter and to press CTRL+SHIFT+F4.Mike, it isn't the perfect product as it needs some further refinements. But the project is costantly evolving. MDMAX team isn't working to produce any other product, it is focusing only on this one, and for sure it will update and evolve this project to implement new systems and things in the panel.RegardsFrancesco

Hi Francesco,>> Why do you compare the flight1's protection method with this oneI thought I had explained that already - because I consider it a fair method.No matter if I buy a new PC or my company exchanges my Laptop or I change my hardware or have to reinstall Windows or whatever : I never even had to contact them to get my products installed again. I understand with the MDMAX system it is different.>> Every developer finds the best way to protect his product.Yes, and my post was meant as feedback regarding that. Maybe it's considered important, maybe/probably not.If I have correctly understood, the MDMAX guys do not want such feedback in their forum, so I thought I post that here.>> But of cos I can understand worries as you never talked or had the chance to meet any of them.Let me say it like this: If they do not trust me, why should I trust them ? ;)Mike

My big problem with developers is not the activation feature. It is the locked forums. The arguments that I have seen for locked forums do not hold water. If you are proud of your product, SHOW IT OFF, warts and all. Let everyone see that you are working to fix them. Oh and to the diehard fanatics, just because I question something, don't act like a heretic came into the forum. Yeah Yeah, I know about the money back from F1, BUT why should I have to fork over the money first, let them use it then have to ask for it back because I have to make a blind decision. Because of the comfy situation with the sim forums and advertisers, you seldom see a post last very long or get locked when someone makes a remark about one of the advertisers that is less than flattering. Blubbering, groveling and scraping is allowed though. Sometimes you wonder, how many of these "insightfull" posts after three circuits in the pattern are from people who are either in bed with the developer, or someone who hopes it will get them in as a playtester.Now, to get to the point. I am thinking about the MDMax because it is an FMC equiped bird like Allegiant Air flies. If the F1 MD were to have plans to upgrade the MD-80 like the real birds were, I would think about waiting.

>I thought I had explained that already - because I consider it>a fair method.Here it is different, for me it isn't a problem, just a different point of view.>Yes, and my post was meant as feedback regarding that. Maybe>it's considered important, maybe/probably not.>If I have correctly understood, the MDMAX guys do not want>such feedback in their forum, so I thought I post that here.At least their forum aren't access restricted like others... so everyone has his methods.>Let me say it like this: If they do not trust me, why should I>trust them ? ;)Come on, we all now about piracy... ;)Ciao FrancescoPSOps... I forgot that I m not on an italian forum, regards ;)

Hi Francesco,oh, I understand "ciao" quite well :)>> Come on, we all now about piracy... ;)Yes, sure. But every developer can decide, if he chooses more or less customer friendly methods. Of course if you are in close contact to the developers, you'll have a different opinion than me ;)Mike

Robert,I see your point, but I can also understand a support forum shall be reserved for those that have bought the product.Besides that, it's difficult to get a clear picture about a product from a developers forum alone. I think it's necessary to ask in independent fora about users opinions. You never know if messages get deleted even in open developers fora. Or you just come in a wrong moment and find unanswered messages about problems, where users haven't read the manual.And also when looking in several fora, it remains difficult. Example : Here in the thread it was said MDMAX is close to PS1 regarding the simulation depth. If I look in the MDMAX forums, I see messages about jumping flight director, plane in IAS Mode climb even descending to accelerate (that's a NO-NO in the MD80 !) or flaps levers only moving if you operate them with the mouse. Besides FDE, for me autopilot accuracy and behaviour is the meat of an MD80 simulation, for others it's closely simulated systems. Or eye-candy or whatever. Difficult to get a complete picture ;).Similar if I say I love the Lago Maddog because of its exceptionally smooth and exact autopilot. It has one problem with LOC intercept, but I always fly the ILS manually because that's a part of the fun in FS for me. So for me a small issue, but if someone loves to use autoland, he should better not buy the Lago (besides the bad support issues). It all comes down to personal preferences. Mike

The trend in software protection clearly goes the direction of hardware-binding, downloadable software and online activation.The majority of software these days is downloadable already. Some programs are even never released on CD or DVD. I for my part expect the number of CD/DVD releases to continue to go down in the future.That said, online activation and binding a license to a single computer (hardware) is a fact today, questioning it is useless.But as such technologies evolve, the support for them matures as well. I have a whole bunch of software which needs to register/activate online, and I never ever encountered any big troubles with any of them.Take cumbersome activation and registration policies as a reality without any alternative. Denying programs which use such procedures means that you gradually lock yourself out of the use of great software. In the end, the looser will be you...Andreas

Andreas,>> and I never ever encountered any big troubles with any of them.Maybe you, but do not close your eyes regarding many users that have problems. Just recently I read a whole series of them. From users that were blamed next to be criminal only by using different IP adresses. They just had a provider using dynamic IP adresses, that was all. But even without knowing what's behind those problems, it should not happen at all. Of course you will rarely find those complains in developers fora, since no one will keep em there.>> In the end, the looser will be you...Are you sure ? To stay at the thread title : Even as an MD80 fan, I would buy three, but I can well survive with the two I have.But don't the payware developers complain about lower and lower sales numbers ? Only a certain percentage of FS buyers buy FS Addons. And now if again a certain percentage of those get lost, because they are turned away by too harsh activation methods ? Again no one should close eyes by looking around in fora. It's many remarks like : "Ok, now the border is crossed, it's enough for me". However, I'm out if that discussion now, enough said. If it gets any developer thinking about the subject, then good. If not, well, I should not care much ;)Mike

>The trend in software protection clearly goes the direction>of hardware-binding, downloadable software and online>activation.>>That said, online activation and binding a license to a single>computer (hardware) is a fact today, questioning it is>useless.Only as long as people are still willing to buy such software.>>Take cumbersome activation and registration policies as a>reality without any alternative. Denying programs which use>such procedures means that you gradually lock yourself out of>the use of great software. In the end, the looser will be>you...That sounds like a joke - of course there is an alternative. I did not buy several new add-ons because of activation, hardware-binding etc. And, you know, it is really very comforting to read about all the problems that people, who bought such software have, and know that I saved my money and can relax and watch the "show" from a "spectator-point-of-view". I can only recommend it, it is good for your health and it is NOT life-threatening to "lock oneself out from some FS-addons"! On the contrary, it is very satisfying! One doesn

At least on the MDMAX the procedure is fully automatic.Some problems can be related to previous, not legal, installation of that SWm which left some wrong reg parameters and weren't overwrited by the new, legal, ones.Other problems may be dued to the fact that people never read, they just do without knowing what to do.Personally I didn't have any problem. At the first time activation u just enter a SN, the programs connects to the server and checks your copy.I can't see those big troubles.RegardsFrancesco

Hi Francesco,SIGH ! I wanted to get out of that discussion, but it seems you do not understand me. Please at least - read the license policy of the developers you are supporting. I can not post it here, but everyone can read it on the MDMAX site :You get a "one shot" activation license for one PC. About the conditions where this license remains active you get NO info before purchase. Is it a hardware change, is it Windows reinstallation or whatever, no one gets to know it before purchase.You can NOT use it on a second PC or Laptop or whatever. You must deactivate your license on the one PC first and then you can reactivate it on another. To my knowledge no other publisher or developer is that restrictive. But what happens if the original PC is defective and you can not access it anymore. Such things happen, how shall you deactivate your license then to free it up ?All this makes you dependent from the goodwill of the developers, you have to spend time to contact them, wait for their working hours and so on. And all that after you have paid 60 Euro.I hope you understood that such methods are unacceptable for some. And I hope, the MDMAX guys will change their customer attitude in future.Mike

Mike,Sorry, but what you say is not true. Here's the part of the license concerning reactivations:"3. MAXIMUM INSTALLATIONS. The license is valid for one PC and the SOFTWARE runs only on the PC where it has been installed and registered. If the SOFTWARE is needed on multiple PCs, a registration for each of them is required. The registration can be transferred from a PC to another, providing that the SOFTWARE remains activated only on a single PC belonging to the same Licensee. In case you need to reinstall the SOFTWARE after a PC upgrade, including, but not limited to, hardware, please keep the sale's receipt ready at your hand, as it contains important data necessary for the reactivation of the SOFTWARE. Sale's receipts WILL NOT BE REISSUED if they are lost, so it is recommended to print it and to store all the correspondence in a safe place. An active connection to Internet is required to install, reinstall and activate the SOFTWARE; the connection to Internet can be located on a different PC, other than that where you wish to install the SOFTWARE."For me it's clearly stated that you can reactivate it on another PC if you uninstall it from the old one. What you cannot do is to have the same license on two PC's. There's nowhere a statement saying that you have only one shot for the activation.Regards,Daniel

Daniel,>> For me it's clearly stated that you can reactivate it on another PC if you uninstall it from the old one. What you cannot do is to have the same license on two PC's. There's nowhere a statement saying that you have only one shot for the activation.Hmmm, Ok, but actually I have said exactly the same :"You can NOT use it on a second PC or Laptop or whatever. You must deactivate your license on the one PC first and then you can reactivate it on another. To my knowledge no other publisher or developer is that restrictive."You have just one activation shot and then it's blocked. To use the activation again, you must first deactivate it. What have I said wrong ?Mike