Huh!!!!? Pro Mike Stone and Free Speech?

[Guest lawyerpilot]

At the same time? How can that be? Read on....I am very much a proponent of vigorous debate and constructive criticism...(just ask my friends, or try me sometime) and believe that a healthy curiosity makes the world go 'round. I agree with Mike 100% on his chef analogy. One must exercise a certain deference to the feelings of freeware developers b/c they have donated their time freely. I think criticism is healthy, very healthy...but a true businessman, leader, or public figure knows that in order to get something you have go about it in a political manner- there is a right way to do something and there's a wrong way----for a Darwinian efficiency based person like myself that is a harsh realty--but in the last couple of years, I have finally come to realize that you can get more by sometimes doing less, hence the "Lose the battle win the War." What's my point? As a pure capitalist, I believe that anyone who is going to go to the lengths of taking your money for a product, should be be striving to make the product as good as it can be, and that includes customer service!! And, as a result of their endeavour, they should be criticized to the fullest extent if the product does not meet your expectation as a consumer. This criticism is how products evolve, and become better. Supply and Demand. However, keep in mind the distinction between freeware and commercial. The commercial realm is not designing and disseminating a product out of the goodness of their heart, they are doing it to make a buck, and that buck comes out of your pocket. You are entitled to the best product they can make. If they don't make the best product, then less people buy it in the long run, and demand dictates their fate. If they fix the product or send it on a gradual evolutionary phase, then perhaps they will retain customers, again demand reigns supreme. In a third scenario, if there is a better alternative to the commercial product, then once again, demand has dictated the course of their product. But, in the converse, what if the product has no alternative? Well, then we are stuck with imperfections that, if the developer truly cannot or won't change them, reside with us during the duration, and no amount of criticism or boycotting will solve the problem.In the freeware realm, we do not have the supply demand equation as such. Sure, you can easily choose to download/not download a product, but what is the repurcussion- no dollars out of your pocket, and no downside to the developer. Your opportunity cost is nothing. His opportunity cost is the time invested in the product, that could have been spent on flying, boating, fishing, drinking, etc. So, THE FREEWARE DEVELOPER CLEARLY HAS SUBSTANTIALLY MORE TO LOSE THAN THE CONSUMER IN THIS SITUATION!!! So, moral of the story, while we should most certainly make RECOMMENDATIONS, not CRITICISMS per se, about freeware developers work, we should be cognizant that these guys are really doing this out of the goodness of their heart and barring any horrific quality defect, we should err on the polite side. (for those who still have a 56k modem, that bad result might understandably be more frustrating b/c of not knowing the product quality until hours later) In summary, we should not filter the posts, or lock threads. However, if you go over and look at Flightsim, you can almost immediately sense a different tone of voice in the posts. Everyone is very antagonistic and cynical. It is a subtle difference, but I truly believe that this forum is much more productive than our friends over yonder. So perhaps the solution is to merely police ourselves from time to time. Easier said than done for some perhaps, but eliminating posts and locking threads seems a little protectionist. Most developers are adults or young adults and can stand the criticism; if they can't, then the real world is going to be a rude awakening.If you really think about it, MS 2k2 was a big improvement, and I have flown about 5000+ hours since the first FS on my Apple 64k in the fifth grade. But whether it was flight models, scenery, AI traffic, clouds, weather, etc. (really 90% of the sim), freeware has taken us light years forward. MS is the one who shold be criticized for putting a product on the shelves that is incomplete. Again, I have to put forth the caveat of relativity. MS is a multi-billion dollar corporation. And for the resources that they have...and considering that a CD (.20-30 cents) and box ($3) are the minority of the $69 purchase price, I think that MS inefficiently used their resources. I mean think about it. If you are talking about a team like Terminal Reality (FLY), to come up with what they did was amazing! Limited resources and team members, but their panels blow away MS! MS on the other hand devoted similar amounts of manpower and time, but they have billions of dollars more resources and made about twice the profit per unit that Terminal Reality did. But, where does that money go, back to developing the product? No. It is easy to see that MS has come to realize that freeware developers will take up the slack b/c not only do they have the knowledge, but our hobby, inherent in its nature and personnel, has an obsession with tweaking and making things better. It's a poor stance by MS, but, have you ever wondered why they only put 5-7 aircraft in the damn sim? B/c they know that you all (the developers are out there) will make more. They don't have to. So, either we create a united fron against MS to put some more effort into each release (given the amount of money that they both have available to them and receive for each unit sold), or we decide that freeware developers are saving a simulation that otherwise should have been labeled a game. And trust me, as an active private pilot who is getting my multi rating in two weeks, and is finishing up the Instrument and hopefully on to commercial, this thing has truly become a simulation after all of the freeware tweaks. IT has saved me thousands in flight training, and I still fly it about 10 hours a week.Well, with more time, I could have written a more poignant response. So, I apology for any rambling, but we all have to step up and be adults, while being respectiful, while pushing for change, while, focusing our attention on the real problem (MS), etc. etc. etc.......Christopher Michael BraunP4 1.8768 ram 80 gig hardriveVisiontek Ti4 4600CH yoke/pedals19" inch monitor-Soundblaster PCI 512Win XPPrivate PilotAOPALawyerPilots Bar AssociationNTSB Bar AsssociationPIC- Warrior, Archer, 172N-SP, Aztec, Malibu SIC (for fun)- Conquest, Cessna Ram 421, King Air C90"Men without dreams are never free, twas thus this way and thus will ever be."

[ErnieAlston 33]

>MS is the one who shold be criticized for putting a product on the shelves that is incomplete. Again, I >have to put forth the caveat of relativity. MS is a multi-billion dollar corporation. And for the >resources that they have...and considering that a CD (.20-30 cents) and box ($3) are the minority of the >$69 purchase price, I think that MS inefficiently used their resources. I mean think about it. If you are >talking about a team like Terminal Reality (FLY), to come up with what they did was amazing! Limited >resources and team members, but their panels blow away MS! MS on the other hand devoted similar amounts of >manpower and time, but they have billions of dollars more resources and made about twice the profit per >unit that Terminal Reality did. But, where does that money go, back to developing the product? The MS development team I'm sure has a budget just like any other group in Microsoft, and it may not have been much more than what TRI put into producing FLY!II.It does not follow that because MS made more money they must have invested more money in development.And clearly there are areas of FS2002 that are much better than FLY!II.Regards.Ernie.

[Guest]

Christopher,Just to make this short and not start another thead :-) My arguement isnt a Mike Stone thing.I and many others admire his work. I have have over the years spent thousands of hours helping freeware projects not in the limelight of forum Fame and glory but in the background.One particular Meridian Builder even had all my real world Meridian pictures sent to him a short while back ;-)Get one thing clear I and any other freeware developer do this for themselves because they enjoy what they are doing some (I cant talk for Mike Stone but I know others personally) Get a kick from the status, gratitude and admiration their work generates for them in this community.It was unfortunate that the post concerning Mikes Meridian was a culmination of concerns that I had over a change of attitude over any critical comments against freeware whether that was Positive, constructive criticism or not.Both posters were Polite,nervous, apologetic and over complimentary before dropping the fact that maybe the aircraft was too slow or maybe the proportions werent quite right.There has to be something wroung there as it never used to be that way.We relished our work being pulled apart, we relished ideas, suggestions coming from the forums, We even placed up pictures so people could be critical early on.As a chef Im afraid I would go around and ask whether the food was too salty or too greasy so that I could get it right.No I wouldnt expect my friends to eat and be greatful regardless.Trouble is Mikes food is great and he isnt really the issue here :-)Peter

[Guest]

Peter,I think that there seems to be a bit of "overcautiousness" to not offend freeware authors when pointing out an issue with his or her release is just a fact of life. As has been hashed over in these few threads by myself and others, the freeware author is doing what he does out of love for the hobby and his or her genorosity. Most people here seem to recognize that and treat the freeware people a little more "gently". As has been pointed out, in other forums that is not the case. I know that if I email a freeware designer with a question or a problem I find myself acting in much the same way (careful not to offend, or not to be harsh in my criticisms). If that's good or bad, I'm not sure, but I find that I am much more aware of the feelings involved when it comes to freeware over some of the payware organizations. Just my 2 cents worth, and thanks for bringing up this rather important and insightful topic.MikeKOCF

[Guest]

MIKE (a.k. LAWYERPILOT),I agree with you 95%. I started a thread here a few days ago starting a topic regarding MS near monopoly on the FS market. The thread was slight aggressive pointing out that MS 2002 is mostly a patch for FS2000. Comparing Realistic functionality of FLY! and MS FS 2002, it turned into a heated debate. The debate turned into a FLY! vs MS FS2002 issue, and MR. L. Anderson start "Nasty" personal attacks. The thread was quickly delete my Tom Answorth (sorry sp).CB

[Guest]

Ernie,If you do some investigation, MS has a relatively (2 years)new complete BUILDING COMPLEX on the MS campus STRICKLY DEVOTED to MS FS developement. As well, as personel base that is unparraleled. MS FS 20002 is an absolutely PATHETIC product for having that type of financial support and resources.MS even has a web page with photos of the MS FS building complex.CB

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

I just hate when that happens; you know, when folks make statements as FACT, when IN FACT, they are wrong.The new buildings you refer to ARE NOT on the MS campus. IN FACT, they are pretty far from the actual MS "campus". And... more importantly, they are not solely dedicated to FS. Does XBox ring a bell, and just about a gazillion other things going on there? How do I know? I was there exactly a year ago. :)

[LAdamson 240]

Well............... Capt. Bob is WRONG & very "uniformed" with just about everything else concerning FS2002, so I'm not surprized about this either!!L.Adamson

[Guest Lizardo]

If I may add something...I do a lot of aircraft research. And from 3 "experts" you can get 7 opinions as to how a plane behaves. I have gotten so fed up with it that I write the maufactuter's directly. (you'll get 2-3 from me also on ones I have flown). So, my analysis is "as advertised" and if someone somewhere did it different, good for him. #2 in the rush to get a plane out, or anything out, the very best of us sometimes go too quickly and don't have friends check it out. I like Mike's work quite a lot, and look forward to the next. And his dedication a LOT...he certainly is not the the league with the guys who stick 737 sound files on turbo props or some of the other trash (yes, trash) I have found in any-ware. To all developers, my only request is: send it around as a beta first. To those who don't fly and nit pick: dump it and get another aircraft.

[LAdamson 240]

Mr. Capt. Bob.....It didn't turn into a heated FLY vs MSFS2002 issue! That's been debated SO many times in the past, that it falls on deaf ears. And BTW, my "nasty" attack was really one of the "tame" ones! :) You will FAIL miserably everytime when jumping over the fence to shove FLY's REALISM on us "unknowing & "uneducated" souls who have been "brainwashed" by MS. :)Now, many here...... are going to say......... don't include ME in that "unknowing/uneducated" remark! And that's my point! It's obvious you have no idea of who the "audience" IS here!!!! As I previously pointed out, this forum consist's of Commercial, GA, military, hardcore & causual simmers who know exactly what MSFS can & can't do. If you attempt to "shove" your supposeable (but un-substanciated) flying creditionals upon us in the method you attempted, such as stating FLYII's realism versus FS2002 being "Pathetic",... won't work & just becomes a joke behind your back.Truth is--------------- FS2002 is quite an advancement from FS2K. In many respects, FLYII went backwards from the original FLY/FLY2K. Just accept it!! :-lol :-lol L.Adamson (not Anderson)