Just Do It! Please!

[p.delorenzo]

Alright, I'm a RF G3.5 customer and I have all the add-ons (1to5) and expansion packs (1to4).

I'm really, really interested about the new RF G4 simulator... BUT I'm using a lot of aircrafts from the add-ons and I really would like to see them available on RF G4.

So, please, make it possible to use the aircrafts (and airports) from the add-ons WITHOUT undergrading this new product.

By the way, making previously add-ons available under RF G4, more customers from RF G3 and G3.5 will be pleased to switch to RF G4!

Or, at least, if you can't make a compatibility for all the add-ons, think about a way to make these following aircrafts availble (this is a VERY VERY short list of the aircrafts I'm using):

From RF AOV3
Extra 330 AE
Extra 330 3D AV
Sukhoi AE
Sukhoi - 3D Version AV
From RF AOV4
Edge 540 AE
Extra 330S AE
Harrier AE
From RF AOV5
JayHawk AE
MD500E AE
Osprey AE

Please! Just Do It! Please!

Last words: thanks to KE guys who take into account customers feedback and put into RF G4 a lot of requested features.

Best regards.

Pascal de Lorenzo

If there are other guys thinking like me out there just post it here and talk to KE guys!

 

[jeffpn]

I was thinking about the same thing today. There are several aircraft that I'd like to see available in G4. My list even overlaps with your list. I will hate to do without them. When I bought G3, I sold my G2. Now it looks like that won't be an option.

 

[int2str]

Why are you guys so hung up on using existing aircraft model?

Remember who made these models in the first place - fans and hobbyists! I'm sure as soon as people get their hands on the new G4, they will update the existing models as necessary and create new ones. That's how it works.

Don't ask KnifeEdge etc. to be forever compatible with old models. It hinders progress and can be a real support nightmare.

As long as KnifeEdge provides a good editor or documentation, people will always create new content for whatever the current version is.

Be patient guys!

 

[p.delorenzo]

Remember who made these models in the first place - fans and hobbyists! I'm sure as soon as people get their hands on the new G4, they will update the existing models as necessary and create new ones. That's how it works.

Don't ask KnifeEdge etc. to be forever compatible with old models. It hinders progress and can be a real support nightmare.
Be patient guys!

1-It seems you didn't understood what we are asking for! We are not asking for making G4 compatible with user custom models but with, at least, the models KE themself created! Remember... we are talking about Add-Ons Disks!

2-By the way, it seems, too, you are not aware of software business reallity: in a software business there is something called BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY! What is this really really strange thing? Think a minute: Do you think Microsoft could have sold new versions of Word, Excel, Access, and many others, whitout the ability for the new versions to use files that were created with previous one!!!!!!!! As YOU SAY: That's how it works!!!!

Where do you live int2str????? Show me your WORLD!!!!! I WANT TO SEE IT!

 

[int2str]

Touchy touchy touchy...

Backwards compatibility for a word document is fine. For a RC flight simulator, why should there be such a requirement?

You bought and Add-on for RealFlight G3. When you bought it, where did it say it would work for all future versions.

I'll give you an example:
- Let's say you buy a roof-rack for a 1993 BMW 3 series. Nice, good, works well. Now you buy a 2007 BMW 3 series. Oh boy, roof rack doesn't work anymore. Is it BMW's responsibility to make sure all previous parts still work on the new car? Or do you think since the roof rack worked on the car you bought it for you might have gotten your money's worth?

A more crass example:
- You bought a nice VHS tape of a great movie you like for your shiny new VHS player. Now, should the movie makers use VHS for eternity, or are you allowing them to switch to DVD because of all it's technological advances?

My point is, you got what you paid for. The addon still works for your G3 and the release of G4 does not change that. There'll be add-ons for G4 I'm sure down the road. Don't like the fact you'd have to buy them again? Well then don't.

Look at the PS3 disaster... They couldn't get the PS2 emulation to work in software, so they stuck a PS2 inside every PS3 so whiny little teenagers wouldn't complain about backwards compatibility. Now everyone who's just interested in PS3 games gets to pay extra for a larger-than-needed PS3 console with a huge heat sink. Is that worth it when you could have kept your PS2 around and fired it up when need be?

Pah, not sure why I'm making such a long post...
Guess I'm just fed up with all the whiners around here.

KnifeEdge [or insert manufacturer here] can't win. They don't release a new version - everybody whines. They release a new version - everybody whines. It's always something - "graphics too bad", "engine too old", "requirements too high", "not backwards compatible enough", "not high-end enough" bla bla bla

Review the software in your hobby store. Buy it if you want, leave it if you don't.
Your G3[.5] still works; go play!

Me? I'm anxiously waiting for G4!
And the more useless backwards compatibility they left out in favor of a new graphics/physics/scenery engine or whatever the heck they decided, the better!

My only complaint? Why can't I order my upgrade yet?

 

[Dustyk]

Touchy touchy touchy...

Backwards compatibility for a word document is fine. For a RC flight simulator, why should there be such a requirement?

You bought and Add-on for RealFlight G3. When you bought it, where did it say it would work for all future versions.

I'll give you an example:
- Let's say you buy a roof-rack for a 1993 BMW 3 series. Nice, good, works well. Now you buy a 2007 BMW 3 series. Oh boy, roof rack doesn't work anymore. Is it BMW's responsibility to make sure all previous parts still work on the new car? Or do you think since the roof rack worked on the car you bought it for you might have gotten your money's worth?

A more crass example:
- You bought a nice VHS tape of a great movie you like for your shiny new VHS player. Now, should the movie makers use VHS for eternity, or are you allowing them to switch to DVD because of all it's technological advances?

My point is, you got what you paid for. The addon still works for your G3 and the release of G4 does not change that. There'll be add-ons for G4 I'm sure down the road. Don't like the fact you'd have to buy them again? Well then don't.

Look at the PS3 disaster... They couldn't get the PS2 emulation to work in software, so they stuck a PS2 inside every PS3 so whiny little teenagers wouldn't complain about backwards compatibility. Now everyone who's just interested in PS3 games gets to pay extra for a larger-than-needed PS3 console with a huge heat sink. Is that worth it when you could have kept your PS2 around and fired it up when need be?

Pah, not sure why I'm making such a long post...
Guess I'm just fed up with all the whiners around here.

KnifeEdge [or insert manufacturer here] can't win. They don't release a new version - everybody whines. They release a new version - everybody whines. It's always something - "graphics too bad", "engine too old", "requirements too high", "not backwards compatible enough", "not high-end enough" bla bla bla

Review the software in your hobby store. Buy it if you want, leave it if you don't.
Your G3[.5] still works; go play!

Me? I'm anxiously waiting for G4!
And the more useless backwards compatibility they left out in favor of a new graphics/physics/scenery engine or whatever the heck they decided, the better!

My only complaint? Why can't I order my upgrade yet?

This is such the truth. I try and stay out of things like this because the others never listen. Anyway, I just wanted to say good post. I just wish I knew when this was going to be available because Im ready to buy as I dont have 3.5.

 

[p.delorenzo]

Pah, not sure why I'm making such a long post...

I could answer to this question!
IT'S BECAUSE YOU ARE ARGUING WITH NOTHING TO!

The one who need to talk so long is the one who try to HIDE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!

And for your information maybe you have to know that ALL the add-ons are compatible with the following RealFlight versions:
Classic, Deluxe,Generation 2, 3 and 3.5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm just asking to KE to stay on the way they already decided to follow!!!!

By the way, you still didn't tell me in which world you live in!!!

And I can see you are a newcomer on this forum. Hope you bought your KE softwares like everyone here did.

Have a nice day.

 

[opjose]

The one who need to talk so long is the one who try to HIDE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm... I disagree.

The "terse" posters frequently have no basis to back their arguements, so they are usually quite short and unfounded.

This is not a good touchstone to use in evaluating the veracity of a post.

Coherence is a good thing.

 

[p.delorenzo]

Hmmm... I disagree.

The "terse" posters frequently have no basis to back their arguements, so they are usually quite short and unfounded.

This is not a good touchstone to use in evaluating the veracity of a post.

Coherence is a good thing.

Ok guys, this thread was not created to argue to know if KE is right or not to stop backward compatibility but to collect all the customers who wish KE don't stop it. Reread the first post to understand what I mean.

If you understand this and don't care about this just go ahead and walk your way! And please don't read the following.

Opjose, if think you are a great guy. Not because you are clever, skilled, beautiful, strong or anything else. Just because you helped a lot of KE customers here.
It's your choice to tell if you agree or not. But, please, don't think you can pu people on a group based on so few parameters.
There are different "terse" posters, as you said. When they are quite short it's because they are confident on temselves and don't want to convince anybody. No matter if they are right or wrong!
This there arguing is quite long it's because they try to convince and, from what there arguments relies on you can tell for sure if they have no basis to back their arguements.
If they use there own life experience and/or have a strong understanding they use facts to argue. If, like here, they use analogies it's because they have no understanding or experience to rely on but want to try to convince, nomatter why they do it.
I'm an Electronic Engineer, I'm developing electronic hardware and embedded firmware. Doesn't mean I know everything and I'm always right. But, with my own little experience I can tell that software success and longevity relies, partly but surely, on backward compatibility.
Why do you think Microsoft/Adobe/Corel... are still number one in there domain even if there is a lot of people arguing against them? Microsoft/Adobe/Corel... keep supporting past files versions to keep his customers! Why do you thing RealFlight have survived until 3.5? Because they keep supporting past files until now! Everyday, we can see software who are doing things better than the number one and because they think it's enough for succes they don't take into account customers needs. In a way, when a software company doesn't support backward compatibility is like saying to there current customers "We don't care about you. Just pay for the new version and don't concentrate on doing productive new work but spent time and money to port what you already have done!"

I was just trying to tell to KE to not do this mistake! What ever you think about it!

By the way, I know a guy who, because he is 90% of the time right, he thinks he his "The One Who Knows Everything". This guys is now so confident in him that he doesn't try to think if others are right, and, right or wrong, he doesn't argue anymore before telling the others they are wrong!!!

Just take a look at this thread: https://forums.realflight.com/showthread.php?t=18387

Remember analogies are not proof of concept!

 

[p.delorenzo]

Backwards compatibility for a word document is fine. For a RC flight simulator, why should there be such a requirement?

This is pointless! Why could it be fine for text processing software and not an RC flight simulator software! It's fine, if not mandatory, for every software product!
As you are a new comer let me remember you that Add-Ons Volume 5, which was release a few weeks ago, could be used with G2, G3 and G3.5 RF versions!
You are not helping anybody by telling this. Neither KE and, most importantly, surely not KE customers!

I'll give you an example:
- Let's say you buy a roof-rack for a 1993 BMW 3 series. Nice, good, works well. Now you buy a 2007 BMW 3 series. Oh boy, roof rack doesn't work anymore. Is it BMW's responsibility to make sure all previous parts still work on the new car? Or do you think since the roof rack worked on the car you bought it for you might have gotten your money's worth?

A more crass example:
- You bought a nice VHS tape of a great movie you like for your shiny new VHS player. Now, should the movie makers use VHS for eternity, or are you allowing them to switch to DVD because of all it's technological advances?
?

Your examples are analogies, and only that! And outside the scope of software products! Can't be used too demonstrate anything except your misunderstanding of the software business... lol

Pah, not sure why I'm making such a long post...

I had already answered to that...

 

[Norton]

p.delorenzo

(As you are a new comer let me remember you that Add-Ons Volume 5, which was release a few weeks ago) What are you talking about? #5 has been out for a LONG time.

P.S. Spelling and grammar needs some help. ( At least on this post ).

 

[jbourke]

We know that our customers would like to see G4 support Add Ons 1-5. We've already stated that we are working toward a solution.

Jim

 

[Norton]

Thanks Jim, I understand that but others don't?

 

[jbourke]

Thanks Jim, I understand that but others don't?

Seems that way.

Jim

 

[p.delorenzo]

We know that our customers would like to see G4 support Add Ons 1-5. We've already stated that we are working toward a solution.

Jim

I apologyze Jim, I didn't know that KE was already working on this. Didn't read or hear something about this before. This is why I started this thread.

Again thank you and thanks a lot to KE guys.

P.S. Spelling and grammar needs some help. ( At least on this post ).

I think it could be acceptable for someone, like me, who is not a native from an english spoken country!! Could you tell the same thing about you?

 

[Norton]

p.delorenzo

(I think it could be acceptable for someone, like me, who is not a native from an english spoken country!! Could you tell the same thing about you?)

I was not trying to be rude, as it seemed your other posts were fine. Just thought you were typing fast or something.

Now that you know that KE is working on this problem it seems this thread should be closed? Just a thought being that this thread is nothing but a argument and speculation over something that is being worked on by Knife Edge already?

 

[opjose]

Opjose, if think you are a great guy. Not because you are clever, skilled, beautiful, strong or anything else. Just because you helped a lot of KE customers here.
It's your choice to tell if you agree or not. But, please, don't think you can pu people on a group based on so few parameters.

Heh...

I wasn't commenting on your post, I was commenting only on whether the length of the post indicates that someone has no basis to talk or if a long post indicates a LACK of knowledge as you've insinuated.

As you yourself said "don't think you can pu people on a group based on so few parameters." citing the length of or the verbosity of a post as criteria does just that!

In a way you re-affirmed what I indicated, by your longer post...

So I will do you the favor of NOT assuming that you are trying to "hide that you have nothing to say" since you did post a long reply.

 

[p.delorenzo]

So I will do you the favor of NOT assuming that you are trying to "hide that you have nothing to say" since you did post a long reply.

Opjose, you're a nice guy. But you and me know that you are arguing and talking about upon few words of what others tell. Or, didn't you read what I wrote?
Remember: long post is done by someone who want to CONVINCE people of something no matter if he's right or wrong!
Post LENGTH let us evaluate how much someone wants to convince people.
And HOW he tries, using facts or analogies, let us evaluate the veracity of a post!

Anyway. I'm OK to close this thread. How do we do that?