Warning about ImagineSim Scenery

[Guest UlfB]

> This statement/offer appears at the simMarket site for>Imagine Sim> Airports:>> "Download the demo/evaluation version (18mb - no charge)">Craig,The statement doesn't appear for all ImagineSim sceneries at Simmarket. Kansas City and La Guardia don't have any info about demos. So the OP might have missed this info, just as I did. Funny thing is that OP didn't mention what scenery he's having issues with.Ulf B

[jwenham 1]

>Both sites give you the chance to test before buying and you>apparently chose to ignore it.I did try the demo for KCLT. You can't install the so called SP2 patch untill you have a install key, you cant get the install key untill you buy the product. Seeing that they published a SP2 compatible patch I assumed that it would be. We all know what happens when you assume something. The issues I have are as follows:1) Unable to see Ultimate traffic AI with shadows on. Turn them off and the AI is back. Ground shadows is in sp2 so this should work.2) Almost unusable ATC/radio funtionality. This also is in SP2 so it should work3) Disapearing AutoGen and buildings. This is in SP2 so it should work.Again my main frustation is that they number one blame FSX SP2 when they are offering a SP2 patch and then want to do nothing about the problem. When I say they I am referring to ImagineSim. I also use the Fly Tampa St Maarteen scenery for FSX and do not have these issues so how can ImagineSim say it is MS fault. I guess customer no service wins again and the consumer looses. I also am aware of Sim Markets refund policy but they are also at fault for letting the vendor sell a bad product. I will not go back to SP1 for I feel SP2 is superior. This problem is like you buying cable TV service being told you will get your local TV channels but after buying it find out you still need rabbit ears to pick up the stations. I work hard for my money and this down right sucks! If they wont give me my money back then so be it lesson learned and I hope they enjoy my money more than I am enjoying their product.

[FTD1949 0]

Ulf, You are correct re: the statement at simMarket but it does appear at the ImagineSim site. Trial downloads for Kansas and LaGuardia are aviailable at the imagine sim site. Craig

[Guest UlfB]

> Ulf,>> You are correct re: the statement at simMarket but it does>appear> at the ImagineSim site. Trial downloads for Kansas and>LaGuardia> are aviailable at the imagine sim site.>> CraigCraig,It's to bad that Simmarket doesn't provide demos for all airports when they are available.@jwenhamI've downloaded KCLT demo and will see if I can reproduce the errors. 1. I don't have Ultimate Traffic.2. In what way does the KCLT scenery make ATC/radio unusable?3. Could you post a picture of the area where autogen/buildings disappear?Ulf B

[jackcnd 0]

Sorry, a demo does not let anyone off the hook in this case.If a retailer / developer proclaims it works with SP2 then it should PERIOD. If it does not then offer a full refund, and remove the statement.

[FTD1949 0]

Some of the buildings/AutoGen will dissapear and reapear in the demo as that is how it is set up. Yes. There is a trial version in the

[jwenham 1]

Yes I'm sure it is not system related. Imagine Sim is owning up to the problems but refuse to do anything about it. I dont have this problem with Fly Tampa's St Maarteen Scenery, (Which is awesome by the way).

[Guest UlfB]

@jackcnd:>If a retailer / developer proclaims it works with SP2 then it>should PERIOD. I think that somebody first have show that jwenhams issues are caused by SP2 compatibility problems.@jwenham:I installed the demo, but this was the worst hit on fps I've experienced ever.>3) Disapearing AutoGen and buildingsYes, there is a big area around the airport with absolute no autogen/buildings. Not good.I didn't investigate your other issues becaus I don't have Ultimate Traffic and the low fps just made the whole experience very frustrating.Ulf BCore2Duo X6800 3.3GHz4GB RAM Corsair XMS2-8500C5BFG 8800GTX, Creative SB X-FiFSX Acc/SP2, Vista 32

[FTD1949 0]

>>Both sites give you the chance to test before buying and>you>>apparently chose to ignore it.>>I did try the demo for KCLT. You can't install the so called>SP2 patch untill you have a install key, you cant get the>install key untill you buy the product. Seeing that they>published a SP2 compatible patch I assumed that it would be.>We all know what happens when you assume something. The issues>I have are as follows:>>1) Unable to see Ultimate traffic AI with shadows on. Turn>them off and the AI is back. Ground shadows is in sp2 so this>should work.>>2) Almost unusable ATC/radio funtionality. This also is in SP2>so it should work>>3) Disapearing AutoGen and buildings. This is in SP2 so it>should work.>>>Again my main frustation is that they number one blame FSX SP2>when they are offering a SP2 patch and then want to do nothing>about the problem. When I say they I am referring to>ImagineSim. I also use the Fly Tampa St Maarteen scenery for>FSX and do not have these issues so how can ImagineSim say it>is MS fault. I guess customer no service wins again and the>consumer looses. I also am aware of Sim Markets refund policy>but they are also at fault for letting the vendor sell a bad>product. I will not go back to SP1 for I feel SP2 is superior.>This problem is like you buying cable TV service being told>you will get your local TV channels but after buying it find>out you still need rabbit ears to pick up the stations. I work>hard for my money and this down right sucks! If they wont give>me my money back then so be it lesson learned and I hope they>enjoy my money more than I am enjoying their product. Jw, I downloaded and installed the demo version and in the zipped file there is a version for both SP1 and SP2 (dated Feb 18,2008) and installed. I experienced none of the problems you have related to usso I believe it might be a system specific problem. CraigLian Li PC 65B CaseCorsair HX Series CMPSU-620HX 620W Power SupplyPlextor PX-810SA/SW-BL DVD/CDGiagabyte GA-P35-DS3RCrucial Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500)Arctic Freezer 7 ProIntel E6850 Core 2 Duo 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 Cache @ 3.6 GHzEVGA 7950GT KO 512mb 169.21_forceware whqlSeagate Barracuda 7200.10 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATASeagate Barracuda 7200.10 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATAWinXP Pro SP2

[Guest UlfB]

>I experienced none of the problems you have>related to us so I believe it might be a >system specific problem. Craig,As I said in my previous post in this thread. I also installed the demo (FSX SP2 version) and there are a lot of missing autogen all around the airport. How could you miss that one.Ulf BCore2Duo X6800 3.3GHz4GB RAM Corsair XMS2-8500C5BFG 8800GTX, Creative SB X-FiFSX Acc/SP2, Vista 32

[ahuimanu 50]

>If they truly said that "most airline simmers are ditching>SP2 now and are going back to FSX+SP1" because they are>unwilling to make their product compatible with the latest>Service Pack ... then that's not just a bold statement.>>It's the main reason why I think in the next version of Flight>Simulator, companies that say those kinds of things just>aren't going to be allowed to have their products interact>with the FSX.EXE>>It's statements like this that will cause Microsoft to limit>development to "approved, licensed" product.>>Here's a company that should take a good look at its website>and count the number of times it uses Microsoft's registered>trademarks improperly. If I'm Microsoft ... that's certainly>what I'm doing if you're trashing my product to my customers.>>They don't HAVE to allow just anyone to use their trademarks.They are some heavy statements; are they your opinion or do you know something vis-a-vis your involvement with Accel? I certainly hope that the SDK continues to be available for freeware people. Also, let's not demonize a 3rd Party Developer so quickly. It is very difficult to get an add-on to market and the experiences of the last 18 months (RTM -> SP1 -> Accel -> SP2) have been tumultuous for commercial add-on developers. I have not idea on the actual claims the OP makes here, but the ImagineSim developer has been around for a while and seems to put out good product.In any case, you are correct in that MS can control product that is associated with thiers, but the SDK is there to encourage add-on development. I am not certain that ACES is equipped to handle the policing you are describing. I think the community, through sites like AVSIM, has done a reasonable job and policing the community by getting the word out about quality and deception.Furthermore, the EULA for the SDK only describes grant of license for use of the SDK, protection of intellectual property contained with the SDK and the extent of indemnity regarding Microsoft's liability when we use their SDK. Nowhere is the commercial sales of products developed with the SDK mentioned in the EULA. Again, while unscrupulous practices in any market are regrettable, I'd say that the FSX experience was not smooth for anyone and we might want to give people the benefit of the doubt this time around. You can't have the shaky ground of the SDK-as-moving-target experience of FSX and then look to tar and feather people who are having a hard time with it. Phil has provided (controversial) guidance on what is FSX compliant and SP2 compliant and it would be up to customers to engage vendors with this information.In any case, I am not keen on heavy-handed licensing for add-on products. It will only favor the guys already in the game with reknown and connections to ACES - the freeware guy wanting to move up will have a harder time.Let's stick to community and word-of-mouth efforts rather than heavy-handed license policing and control.On the OP's points: Simmarket is a risk, I too have learned this the hard way. On ImagineSim's SP2 incompatibility, read the scenery design areas of the forums at fsdeveloper.com, you'll find that many developers heavily rely on the "FS9 path," as Phil calls it, to give us add-on airport scenery at the levels we've come to expect. Many claim that making airports with a totally FSX-SP2 sdk approach is nearly impossible when the goal is to product a product of the same caliber made possible with the FS2002 and FS2004 SDKs.What we all need to realize is that, from SDK to SDK and from version to version, Microsoft/ACES giveth and taketh away. There are features 3rd Party Developers have come to rely on that are gone in the FSK SDKs (RTM, SP1a and SP2). As developing a quality add-on takes a VAST number of hours and effort, having the SDK change once every six months since 2006 has caused irregularities. This particular topic has been hotly discussed in recent months; you'll find many 3rd Party Developers are not exactly pleased about the moving target of FSX.

[jwenham 1]

Do you use Ultimate Traffic. If so and you have aircraft ground shadows on the AI will become invisable. All I could see are the lights (I use the Shockwave Lights).

[FTD1949 0]

Ulf, I stand corrected re: the autogen. Still if he had downloaded the demo he may have seen that too.CraigLian Li PC 65B CaseCorsair HX Series CMPSU-620HX 620W Power SupplyPlextor PX-810SA/SW-BL DVD/CDGiagabyte GA-P35-DS3RCrucial Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500)Arctic Freezer 7 ProIntel E6850 Core 2 Duo 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 Cache @ 3.6 GHzEVGA 7950GT KO 512mb 169.21_forceware whqlSeagate Barracuda 7200.10 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATASeagate Barracuda 7200.10 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATAWinXP Pro SP2

[Guest fsxmissionguy]

Couple of points:1) Of course, I am expressing my own opinion on what the future might hold. Phil Taylor is here to speak for Microsoft and he doesn't make peons like me privy to ACES plans except for what he tells you and me on his blog and on posts here at AVSIM.2) I would like to see a very robust development environment for FSX and for FSNext. I think that's the best possible way to keep the hobby aspect of Flight Simulator alive and well. I, too, support a community of freeware developershttp://www.flightsimulatorxmissions.comin addition to doing mission design work for a part-time income. So I do have a dog in this particular fight in that I'd rather not see an expensive or cumbersome "officially licensed for FSNext" scheme put into place.But come on ... let's get real. If I'm Bill G (and I'm not) and I see 3PDs are gonna tell people to uninstall Microsoft service packs and otherwise badmouth my product ... maybe I'm gonna reassess the whole thing. Maybe I want partners instead of critics.I have no claim to inside knowledge ... but that seems like a reasonable course they could choose to take. Apple, just to cite one example, doesn't just let anyone develop for the iPhone. You have to apply to be an iPhone developer:http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/So, having "registered developers" and an "application process" in exchange for getting the SDK isn't exactly a unique idea.FSX is a flagship Microsoft brand asset - probably fourth in line behind Windows, Office and Exchange. I'm quite certain a guy as smart as Phil Taylor is thinking hard about how to protect that brand.I know I would be.Wouldn't you?

[jwenham 1]

Craig,For the 100th time I DID DOWNLOAD THE TRIAL VERSION! I just looked back at their web site and they changed the demo download. When I did the demo there were not options for SP1 and SP2. There was however a SP2 patch that was available but the only way to install it was if you had a installation key which AT THE TIME you could only get if you had purchased the FSX version. Jim