Post Critical Of The Lack Of Specific SP1 Information

[nudata 10]

The thread, where I made critical comments about Microsoft, has been locked. I object to this. The commentary was critical of the lack of specific information on the up-coming SP1 set of fixes to FSX. I stand behind that commentary. I continue to believe that Microsoft should provide a list of issues they intend to fix and perhaps a list of those that may not be fixed. In my professional career that was always done by our software providers. In fact, they often held large meetings to present the issues list and encouraged input relative to it. After-all we are all seeking a better product. If there is a policy that criticism of Microsoft is not going to be tolerated then that should be stated, as should any policy regarding criticism of the providers of products to the simming community. It is through criticism that we effect change. Personal attacks are of-course un-warranted. I will confess to saying that I believe that the Program Manager made a bad decision to not publish a listing of targeted fixes. A really hard-hitting flame!It is becoming ever more difficult to be politically correct.Regards,Dick BoleyA PC, an LCD, speakers, CH yoke

[Geofa 108]

I can't speak for Brian but..If this place was politically correct the thread would have been deleted.It was not-your post was left and still can be read. Your point was made.The potential for the following commentary to head south is why it was locked. That we are not allowing anymore.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[mgh 89]

You believe that Microsoft should provide an advance list of issues they intend to fix. Microsoft doesn't for good reasons - they may not, in the event, be able to fix all of them and then there would be even more flames. What you experienced in discussions between software professionals is irrelevant in this case.

[Guest boleyd]

I see what you mean Geof....

[BobP 56]

Short of being invited to attend the project meetings, you really expect ACES to release the fixes prior to fixing them? And why is it so important that MS release SP1 information? I don't really care what advance information they release. My only interest is downloading the patch, re-installing FSX and heading in to the wild blue yonder. :) I'll figure out the fixes over time and whether or not they benefited me. Bob...

[Guest Stoopy]

I'm gonna guess that being politically correct has nuthin' to do with it. More like, just using plain ol' straightforward manners.Most folks who'd wanna know something just go right ahead and politely ask the question - as in "Can ACES identify the list of expected features in the upcoming SP1"? See? Simple really. 12 words....banga bado boom, done.But instead, looks like a generally negative approach about the whole affair, and voicing dissatisfaction more than once now, was really more important than just trying to find out the information or reasons why it isn't available. Which then cracks the door open for more unconstructive, unnecessary pot-shots and.....well you oughta get the picture.Leastways that's how it reads on the other side of the monitor over here, and a few others I'd suspect. Good call by th'mods.

[aerdt 0]

I'm not sure of the intentions of the original poster. Let's assume that you get your hands on a list of intended fixes. What would you do with them? Would it benefit you in any way?Let's just be patient, okay?Pat

[PhilTaylor 45]

Until we have the final payload in hand; tested by the beta community and the final test pass - anything I disclose is speculation. We could hit a roadbump with an issue and have to back a change out, for instance.I'd rather take heat for being conservative and close with the information instead of telling you what we aim to fix and not delivering all of it and then taking heat for that.Really, we are in a no-win situation wrt this issue.And consider this, at least 5 posts on my blog and in thread here have disclosed the following about SP1:1)a targeted set of performance and content fixes2)some of what is not in and a hint of some of the content fixes3)a goal of 20% across the board perf boost, with an eye to more4)that the beta community will get a list of whats in, and 5)that I would work to get permission to release that list in publicGiven how typically close-mouthed MS is, that is actually quite a bit more than we actually disclose ahead of time. YMMV as to whether you think thats a lot or not, but it is what I can do now. I apologize I cant do more, but that is what it is.

[Cruachan 705]

Hi,I agree with Phil. Tantalising though it may be, I think we are very fortunate to have been given any information about the content of SP1 before it has been released.Those that are continually fussing over this, ask yourselves: How many other software developers have done this?In my experience, if we are given any info at all it usually accompanies the release of patches/updates either in the form of an announcement on the developer's site/forum or a readme text file included with a downloaded update.For my part, I would be very interested to learn about what has been addressed but, really, it's the end result that matters: stable software that performs reasonably well in most situations on currently available mid-range systems. Mike

[Guest unitedpilot36]

That's more then enough info for me. All I really care about is that there will be a patch to help performance. As others have said, what will you do with this info if it was provided?Probably whine and moan over something else...Just be glad that Aces is communicating with the flight sim community.

[FlyingsCool 3]

To me, the information that was released is plenty. They didn't have to say anything before SP1 was released, in fact I think that is common practice for any given community. By releasing that there will be one, giving us an approximate release date (which I am assuming could slip until May) and telling us that we will likely need a pristine installation for the most part allows me to prepare my installation and plan modifications accordingly.Given that my current installation is fairly modified, the only thing I would prefer would be that when the patch is released we also get a list of which files will be changed so I can integrate the upgrade into my current installation. But if MS can't provide this, I'm sure somebody here will be able to.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[G7USL 117]

>Until we have the final payload in hand; tested by the beta>community and the final test pass - anything I disclose is>speculation. We could hit a roadbump with an issue and have to>back a change out, for instance.>>I'd rather take heat for being conservative and close with the>information instead of telling you what we aim to fix and not>delivering all of it and then taking heat for that.>>Really, we are in a no-win situation wrt this issue.>>And consider this, at least 5 posts on my blog and in thread>here have disclosed the following about SP1:>1)a targeted set of performance and content fixes>2)some of what is not in and a hint of some of the content>fixes>3)a goal of 20% across the board perf boost, with an eye to>more>4)that the beta community will get a list of whats in, and >5)that I would work to get permission to release that list in>public>>Given how typically close-mouthed MS is, that is actually>quite a bit more than we actually disclose ahead of time. YMMV>as to whether you think thats a lot or not, but it is what I>can do now. I apologize I cant do more, but that is what it>is.Phil,Your post has just answered the thread starters question. Thank you for answering. ;-)

[Guest Len]

I think ACE has a pretty good idea of what needs to be done given the sometimes harsh threads that have flourished since FSX was released. I'm much more interested in them spending time (after having absorbed the "feedback" for several months) on finishing SP1 then chasing fix threads.