Thank you for your understanding.I buy much for my FS, but at the moment, I _know_ that when buying I'm in for a servicepack and a long time waiting for patches (2 examples: FeelThere for instance promised a new SP for the 737 long ago, PSS ditto). A shame, it doesn't need to be this way. That's why I'll wait until the Legacy will be complete.Andreas

I agree as to the price, Len. AUD60 is a fair whack (a good bottle of Wild Turkey here in Brisbane!!). I guess the difference between feelthere and EA/Ubisoft etc is volume. The latter are spreading their fixed costs over a very large number of sale units. I know fs developers don't publish their sales figures, but you only have to look at how many people download navdata for a particular product 11,000 for PMDG 737/737)at Richard Stefan's site to get the feeling that fs is very much a niche market by comparison.By the way, I can name at least one developer who has published a/c that I found unflyable, and with woeful support. When I mean unflyable, I'm not suggesting that I couldn't rotate it off the gound and get straight and level, but rather lnav/vnav stuff that was never even close to right. A particular 777 springs to mind.I won't even start on a certain 737 that costs the equivalent of about 3 good bottles... (and I didn't get done by PT on that one)As for the Legacy - looks nice, I'll probably buy it...what the heck.regards,Jeff

Yes I'm Victor and this is a conspiracy to take the public focus from the green people of Mars.Qfa

--> "It's not our policy to give out release dates."

And the answer is as always, greed and the assumption that the end user is basically stupid.For every one vocal user as demonstrated here, there maybe as many as 10-20 users silent for many different reasons.One point you've not addressed anywhere is, what about the boxed products that go into the shops ? Those without internet connections, or are aware of Avsim and other forums ?99.9 % of developers know before release the product is buggy. Commercial pressures are applied by publishers who claim deadlines (yeah sure) don't do their own testing or knowingly, box it and bang it on a shelf, with the attitude "oh dear, YOU told me it was OK" which is of course a lie. Or they take the line of "we'll worry about that later, lets get the money in first".There are of course others who launch very good product out of the box and offer "service packs," which are in fact enhancements to the original.Then we have others. Many of them wannabees, who claim to be the developer or part of, when in fact they either know nothing, or have been introduced much later after development and publishing has taken place, (as demonstrated in this thread). Who make claims of having been a developer of add-ons since year dot, yet don't mention which add on..why ? Because of this, they become all defensive and throw their toys out the pram why ? Because of ignorance due to the true facts to what has taken place behind closed doors much earlier or information they've never been privy to.For as long as you fall for the eye candy, gimmicks and mostly false claims, you wont stop it. I could of course name names, but for the barrage of fruitless and tedious legalise that will follow....(yawns followed by bigger yawns) my times more valuable.I forgot to add, 99.9% of developers don't have a clue as to what's expected in terms of business and support. There are a plethora of products out there which, (and only) in my opinion, break the trades descriptions act. Nor are many developers, trained professional programmers with an ounce of nounce as to what is involved in bringing projects to the commercial field.In fact, I would go as far a say, many are probably developed on copy's of the original tools required....how do I know ? I've seen it done.Your right to rant, shame it falls on deaf ears.Lord Ashleigh of Sealand.

>Yes I'm Victor and this is a conspiracy to take the public>focus from the green people of Mars.>>QfaHe also speaks in riddles just like you..........:-abduct

A kind of interesting thread but I really do think (especially of your post Lord :-) Ashleigh ......... actually I can see Sealand on a good day) that lumping products into the 99.9% mentioned above is really going over the top.A good start would be to mention in particular those products that are properly developed, feature rich and fairly priced because at the moment, any new user seeing this thread would incorrectly assume all commercially released products are total crap. That's not true, though I'll go as far as to say that many actually are.Someone above said it should be up to the developers to put pressure on each other to produce better quality releases. ##### would anyone do that! Aside from there being an unspoken etiquette agreement whereby developers won't openly slag each others products, it would be like trying to encourage a better product being released by XYZSim at the potential expense of sales for ABCSim.It's been said here in the forums time and again, the user is the one that will keep allowing unfinished products to be released, by continung to buy from those developers that some consider to be the ones producing them. Aside from pride, why should anyone spend countless extra months testing, tweeking and bug-fixing, when the end result is maybe a few extra sales? You, the user will keep buying whatever is released and XYZSim will keep releasing perceived crap.....simply because they know you will buy it.If people don't want to end up wasting money, at least have the commonsense to either make an informed purchase (read the forums for a few days and ask questions) or buy from someone that at least offers a limited moneyback guarantee.I should probably read what I've tyed but I've no time so fingers crossed I didn't upset anyone..................I didn't intend to.Dreamfleet Project ManagerGreatest Airliners - DC-8Greatest Airliners - 727 Whisperjethttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

>It's been said here in the forums time and again, the user is>the one that will keep allowing unfinished products to be>released, by continung to buy from those developers that some>consider to be the ones producing them.Whose responsibility is that? In my opinion, that of those who dont post messages or complaints about such developers publicly. If those who buy them, do not know they produce junk, they buy them. There are many new users buying FS almost daily, and they dont all write messages because they are inexperienced. They assume if it is for sale, its OK, if there are no complaints. Such developers can make a profit on those who are new users, as there are a lot more of them, than those who report complaints in every thread about a product.> You, the user will keep buying whatever is released>and XYZSim will keep releasing perceived crap.....simply>because they know you will buy it.Not so, though everyone is not like me, who never buys anything until it has been out for months, and Ive seen rave reviews from the buyers. Because I dont, have -never- bought a single add-on which has not satisfied me.>If people don't want to end up wasting money, at least have>the commonsense to either make an informed purchase (read the>forums for a few days and ask questions) or buy from someone>that at least offers a limited moneyback guarantee.Unfortunately we see many messages about the release of a product, before those who write them, have really flown them very much. So you cant just read them for a "few days" before buying the product. Only the moneyback guarantee will help in such cases.What might help best, is for satisfied users to make lists like some have done, of the products that they like best. It is quite noticiable in these lists, how many different people list the same companies. But, when there are a lot more threads about new releases, before they have been flown much, many new users just jump on the bandwagon, and buy interesting aircraft.

Paul, If your looking for endorsement or a plug for your products, sorry to disappoint. However if you read my post correctly, I do state there are some who indeed create good kit out of the box. Again, I wont name names, that would not be fair on the Russians.I didnt see you swimming to help when the stately pile was on fire. Lord Ashleigh of Sealand

>99.9 % of developers know before release the product is buggy.Nothing like a little hyperbole to brighten the day, eh?For the sake of argument, let's assume that there actually are at least one-hundred payware developers currently active (there aren't of course, but I did say "for the sake of argument!).Q: At the rate of "99.9%," just how many "get it right?"A: Absolutely none! After all, just what does 0.1% of a payware company mean?Paul was being kind when he described your screed as simply "over the top." I'd call it sheer inflammatory hyperbole, laced with numerous errors of fact not to mention grammar. On the other hand, if you were to limit your assertion to programming code, you're closer to being correct. Anyone who's ever done any serious computer programming knows that there's no such thing as 100% error-free code... ;)

"I didnt see you swimming to help when the stately pile was on fire."I have no idea what that means and further more, I don't care. This thread is now locked.