Shaka

Members
  • Content Count

    653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Shaka

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 05/12/1970

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.martinstrong.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No
  1. >Also, it is not compatible with accelerationNot an entirely accurate statement. The 3D models are not compatible with the DX10 preview feature. If you don't use this feature, then you have no problems.I use Acceleration, and it works fine. - Martin
  2. Shaka

    Carrier landing bug?

    ...and check your fuel! It seems a lot easier with 25% fuel as opposed to 95%. With less fuel, you can slow to 120 knots (or so) and make the landing.I know it's hard, but keep trying. Carrier landings are my favourite part of FSX.- Martin
  3. Shaka

    Captain Sim has done it again!!

    >I wholeheartedly agree that everyone should be able to make up>their own mind, but they should also be armed with truthful>information from other customers with 1st hand experience>dealing with CS, and not have CS's very nice commerce>page as the sole basis for their buying decision. I'm not saying we should solely trust the CS website for the basis of our buying decision. I'm saying that although there have been some very public failures on CS's part, there are also many happy customers. There are posts from them in these forums too, and there must be some reason they are satisfied - maybe they had different expectations than you did. Let's face it - some people are only looking at the visual models.I didn't have any issues with the C-130 (there's a new post in the FSX forum about this same point), but it might be worth looking at a review from our favourite website:http://www.avsim.com/pages/1005/C130/C130.htmhttp://www.avsim.com/pages/1205/C130/C130.htm4 1/2 Stars from AVSIM, with not many negative points. In fairness, the second review mentioned some issues that were patched in SP1. As A CS C-130 owner, I was pretty happy, so I take issue when other people tell me that there was anything wrong with it. At a current price of $20 (FS9 version), it's a bargain.On the other hand, the 757 seemed doomed from the start. I was never a fan of the "block" system, and it seemed rather expensive at the time, so I passed on it. I understand there are well-documented bugs that were never resolved, and this seems to have poisoned CS's reputation in the mind of anyone who owned the 757. For the rest of us, this isn't the case.Interestingly enough, the 757 was also reviewed on AVSIM, and received the "Gold Star Award":http://www.avsim.com/pages/1006/CS757/CS757.htmAgain, the review is mostly positive, the main sticking point seems to be performance, due to the external model. So, as a potential customer, I would give more weight to a review from AVSIM before a random post in the forum. For what it's worth, if someone were to post an actual review in the forums, rather than just spouting off, I would probably give them more credit than I do now.The reason I responded to your original post was it seemed inflammatory. Comments like "a company who blatantly lies and deceives it's customers" and "I can assure you that it is loaded with bugs that will give you nothing but frustration..." aren't factual. They are your opinion, unless you can back it up with something. I'm not talking about CS's unfulfilled promises, because this is undisputed, but that is not the same as what your comments imply.- Martin
  4. Shaka

    Captain Sim has done it again!!

    >I can't wait for the replies by all those who feel CS is just>such a great company for providing the versions and exteriors>they want, while leaving all their other customers with>empty promises and a plane they "implied" would be a complete>aircraft, oh I don't know, going on 2 years now!Not everyone has had the same experiences that you have. Your opinion is just that, and everyone should be allowed to make up their own mind. There are plenty of threads, both positive and negative, that should help anyone not familiar with this company.- Martin
  5. Shaka

    Chemical handwarmers - TSA approved?

    My thinking is that you could ask 2 different TSA guys and get 2 different answers. Your best bet is to simply try to bring them, and if they make you throw them out at the security checkpoint, big deal.- Martin
  6. Shaka

    Software business practice

    >Is such a business practice normal in the US ? Is it true,>when buying software from the US one is facing a limited>lifetime ?No, this is not normal business practice. Although they aren't doing anything wrong, they certainly aren't building any goodwill with customers. Although this sort of behaviour is not unheard of, I certainly wouldn't call it normal. It is perfectly reasonable for you to ask to re-activate your software. You aren't the first person in the world to get a new computer. As for the "software has a limited lifetime" comment, I have to wonder if this means that the software "disables" itself after a certain period of time. When you bought the CDs, did they tell you that your licence would expire after a certain amount of time? I doubt it. - Martin
  7. Shaka

    Voltage in Bangkok, Thailand

    Thailand is 220V/50Hz.However, all of my portable electronics have power supplies which automatically adjust (or whatever) to various voltage combinations. For instance, my trusty Macbook Pro is 100-240V/50-60Hz, which I can verify by simply looking at the power supply.More likely than not, the bigger problem will be the plug fitting - Thailand uses this funny 2-plug thing, but again, most places use electrical outlets that fit standard North American 2-plug shaped plugs (sorry for my lack of technical jargon), so again, my trusty Macbook Pro can plug straight into the wall. The only cath is that rarely have I seen the third "ground" hole on these electrical outlets.As a fellow Canadian who makes semi-annual trips to Thailand, I can tell you not to worry about it. Most of your stuff will work, and even if your plug doesn't fit the hole in the wall, the hotel people can hook you up.- Martin
  8. Shaka

    Captain Sim is making a B-52

    >On closer inspection it seems that Captainsim made the>external model (and maybe the flight model too?) whilst>Virtuali (now known as "FS Dreamteam") developed the VC and>systems.It may be that CS does not have a complete in-house design team and works with third parties the same way as Aerosoft does. On the CS website, they offer a product called "XLoad" which is a F-117A Nighthawk combined with a F/A-18D. The F/A-18D is obviously very similar to the Acceleration F-18 and includes the same virtual cockpit, and uses many of the same gauges (not really any custom systems). So, perhaps Virtuali designed the entire aircraft and sold it through CS?My point is that all of CS's products may be like this (same idea as Aerosoft, Lago or Flight1). Nothing wrong with that, but I think where CS went wrong is that they overextended themselves in the past and were unable to meet their own expectations. Many people have been let down - this is especially true for the 707/757 users, but I personally don't have too much to complain about.The one thing that really bothered me was when they started releasing products in the "Block" format. At the time, I thought that they were just trying to make more money, but now I think that they were trying to push unfinished products out the door with a genuine intent to finish them "soon". That's the reason I never bought the 757 - I figured I would wait until the entire project was done, and then I would think about it.I think somebody said it earlier - that some people are happy because CS met their expectations. Some people are not because CS did not fulfill their promises. Hopefully they will learn from their mistakes.- Martin
  9. >>>>Are you being serious? >>>>Yes, I am.>>>Violating an EULA does not equate to piracy. I think that>>since he owns a legally purchased copy of the software, I>>think he should be allowed to install only a portion of the>>software. Besides, as strict as the FS EULA is, we are>still>>allowed to mod it even when we try to make changes which>>aren't documented our supported through the SDK. This seems>>to fall into the same category.>>No... he legally purchased a license to use a single copy on a>single PC. He doesn't own the software. Period. The license>is the EULA. If you violate the EULA, you have no right to>use the copy.>>I'm intimately familiar with EULAs... having taken major>corporations to task for trying to find ways around them. I>can assure you, that if you violate the EULA, you no longer>are licensed to use the software. No exceptions. I can also>assure you... you don't own the software.>Yawn...Same old argument - "you don't own the software, you purchased a license, etc". We get it. Whatever - he's still not a pirate, no matter how many times you "assure" me.- Martin
  10. Shaka

    Acceleration Uninstall

    I was having some problems (now resolved), and when I uninstalled it, I had my original FSX installation back without any problems. It probably doesn't hurt to create a restore point too.- Martin
  11. >>>>He may be guilty of violating the Eula in regards to the way>>it's used, but theft or piracy is a stretch! He didn't steal>>it, he paid his $29.95. If he uninstalled it, and returned>it>>for a refund, than you would be correct, but as long as he>has>>a paid copy and he's not distributing it, it's not piracy!>>The EULA is a license to use the software. If you violate the>EULA it is no longer a license... thus any use of the software>is piracy. Please take the time to read the EULA. If you>violate it... the agreement is null and void and you no longer>have an agreement that allows you to use the software.>Are you being serious? Violating an EULA does not equate to piracy. I think that since he owns a legally purchased copy of the software, I think he should be allowed to install only a portion of the software. Besides, as strict as the FS EULA is, we are still allowed to mod it even when we try to make changes which aren't documented our supported through the SDK. This seems to fall into the same category.Everybody chill.- Martin
  12. Shaka

    My repaints on other sites?

    >You need to set your file to "freeware - limited>distribution" or whatever the exact option is. That keeps the>legit sites from hosting your files. In theory, this is true, but it my experience most sites leave it up to the uploader to respect the rights of the original author.I have seen many of my uploads "modified" or "improved" or put into a bigger "all-in-one" package that was then re-uploaded (to AVSIM) as though it was an original work. Sometimes they don't even try to change anything - they just upload the original package to another website without asking. If you complain to the library manger, he will remove it, but there are those who will argue "why not just leave it?". It wouldn't bother me so much if people would at least ask me first, and I would also like some credit for my work. Sometimes I don't even get that.There will always be those people without creative skill who want to contribute, and will attempt to use this method as a means of doing so. Get used to it, and try to think of it as a compliment.- Martin
  13. Shaka

    Conveyer Belt Takeoff- Mythbusters jumps in!!!

    I am not sure why anyone would think this would work. The aircraft needs to generate lift. This is done by air moving over the wings, and has nothing to do with how fast the wheels are moving over a "treadmill". From what I've read, the point is to enable an aircraft to take off without having to rely upon a long runway, but if that is the case, what would the speed of the aircraft be at takeoff?But even if no one here knew anything about physics, I would have to ask the obvious question: "If this was really possible, wouldn't someone have already tried it?".Thank you to the original poster - it gave everyone at work a lot to laugh at today.- Martin
  14. In terms of performance, it might make sense to upgrade from a 8600GTS to a 8800GTX, but I think that the 8600GTS card is at a decent "sweet spot" in terms of price right now. I might wait a few months to upgrade this card.- Martin
  15. >Hi Martin,>You wrote "...but I bought it anyway as a "why not" upgrade.">Note: Upgrade from FSDS v3.0 to v3.5 is FREE...>>Regards>BertYes, of course - please replace "bought" with "downloaded". I guess what I was trying to say is that for existing owners of 3.0, there was no reason not to download it.- Martin