IMPORTANT NEWS!!!!

[liran_bar]

That is great news to the entire fs community!
I agree with Andrew Esselbach.... you can't just take something so many people depend on and make it payware....

Liran Bar, Israel

[Ivan]

I agree with the fact that it's not fair to make an addon which is demanded by 90% of all addon stuff suddenly payware in such a way that none of those addons works until you pay for it

Testing by me gives the following conclusion: it lives happily together with FSUIPC on the same install, no conflicts seen yet

[loomex]

thks for the replies guys!I deleted the fsuipc.dll  file from the modules folder.after I've done this I copyed the fsdconnection.dll file to the modules folder!Is this all that I need to do?Does arrestor cables work with fsdconnecition?Am I supposed to tweak some settings for this to work?

It wont work. That program was encoded to use FSUIPC. It might be a good idea to keep FSUIPC in you flightsim because there are a few programs made where the author has recieved the correct codes from Pete. That means that it will interface with FSUIPC whether you paid for it or not.

[JBaymore]

-on the soapbox-  :(

Hummmmmm........ let's be a little more precise when discussing Peter Dowson's original release of FSUIPC....pre fs2004 ..... before we criticize him too much for now wanting some bucks for his work.

If you look at earlier pre-fs2004 documents from that nice little program...... it WAS released for use without prior payment..... but it was ALSO mentioned he would not refuse voluntary "donations" for his efforts  ;).  To me that was a way of him being very nice to the flight sim community about the release of this awesome utility.... and believing that the community, when it saw what his programming efforts would actually allow, would turn around and reward his skills and hard work with something more than a cursory "thanks".

As I understand it...... he got almost no donations.  But if you read the various flight sim boards......... it seemed that just about EVERYONE was using it and simply raving about it.  (And rightly so.)  I don't know about you........ but that response would leave a bad taste in my mouth.

So the flight sim community grabbed and gobbled up his program...... built a TON of uses for it....... and never really acknowledged it to him in a tangible way.  It sort of became a "given" in life...... death, taxes, and FSUIPC.  That, to me, seems like the FS community in general kinda' took advantage of his generosity in releasing it as a "donations accepted" piece of software in the first place.

Maybe it was a naieve and stupid "marketing move" on his part...... maybe it should have been shareware right from the start.  Possibly he confused the "donations accepted" approach with the "shareware" approach.... thinking that they would be similar in their final effect.  He just was generous enough to not put some crippled features into it or put an expiration on it.

Why he might expect that people would voluntarily donate money is a bit beyond me.  After all, we are in a world where the ripping off of music downloads, copying and "cracking" software, and the like seem to be accepted as "normal" and almost considerd an "inalienable right".

He's not now asking hundreds of dollars for it!  It is a limited interest piece of software.... a small market when looked at in the "bigger picture" of offerings like Flight Sim itself.  Of COURSE it is going to be a bit expensive when compared to the sim itself.  $25 is not really that much money these days, at least in the USA.  (Burger flippers here in NH get about $9 an hour. Car mechanics get $50 an hour.  Lawyers get $200 an hour.  And we don't want to even talk about the highest paid profession in the world...... plumbers  ;).)  

I knew that once FSUIPC went payware that someone would do another version of something like it for free.  That's just the nature of this kind of thing.

But that fact does not make up for the fact that for YEARS a lot of flight sim users and other software developers DEPENDED on his base efforts to make many add ons work at all.  And now that he is asking for a little more in the way of real compensation....... he is getting kinda' "turned on" because of that.

It would be a pretty sad state of affairs if, now that there might be a new free "version" of FSUIPC, the FS community totally turned their backs on Pete Dowson's prior efforts and ignored the contribution that he has made to the field simply because he is trying to make a day's pay.  

If this happens...... shame on us.


If he is guilty of anything.... it is of being naieve... not greedy.

best,

...............john


PS:  If you are destitute and eating out of McDonald's dumpsters..... or a kid living on a small allowance....... hey...... I am all for freeware.  But if you're not truly hurtin' and it is that you simply do not want to pay if you can get it for free..... that's a tad different.

-off the soapbox-

[Selbio]

All I can say is that this new payware FSUIPC is making fps drop considerably. I get around 25-35 with the sim maxed out anywhere without FSUIPC and 12-16 with it.

[BFMF]

John, I agree with part of what you said.

IMO, Pete should atleast allow freeware designers to use FSUIPC, and charge the payware designers

[Michael_De_Feyter]

Hi,
My name is Michael De Feyter and I am the main FDSConnection developer with FlightDeckSoftware.
Let me first correct something I've read in this forum: Our interface does not use FSUIPC! External programs can extract info from FS2004 using our interface without FSUIPC present in de modules directory.
Anyway, here's wat I realy wanted to say. About a year ago some me and some friends of mine decided to start developing our own GlassFlightDeck software for our cockpit project and make and distribute it as freeware. At that time we decided to use the FSUIPC/WideFS interface because it was freeware as well. If then we had known it would become payware some time later, we would never had our sofware depend on it and we would have had it communicate with FS directly. That is the Point! That is why we and a lot of other freeware devolpers were so frustrated by Peter's decision!
That said, I still have a lot of respect for what Pete has done for the community the last years, I myself bought a FSUIPC/WideFS licence because of that. I just cannot accept that people who use our freeware software are forced to do so as well!
regards,
Michael De Feyter
Flight Deck Software
www.flightdecksoftware.com

[loomex]

Michael, Thanks for the input, but I believe the one big question is will this dll allow current programs like FSsound carpet or any other FSUIPC dependent program to work?

[Selbio]

I finally got the FDSConnection module to replace FSUIPC and I have to say that all my add on worked just fine including the FSsound.dll module which I use a lot. The only one thing I found to have conflicts with it was PDMG 737NG, but I don't like it anyways since it a fps killer.

[JBaymore]

Michael,

Hi.  Welcome to SimV.

I just wanted to make very clear here that I have absolutely no issue with your development of an alternative to FSUIPC.  Way to go!  Wish I had the programming skills anymore (mine mainly go back to COBOL, Fortan, and BASIC   ).  As I said in the post above..... and in posts from months ago..... I expected that when Pete Dowson went the "payware" route that someone would soon do that.

No reason someone shouldn't do that if they want to.  And you did..... and it sounds like are the first.  Congratulations.  Your efforts... like his before you.... should be lauded as significant contributions to the flight simulation field.  Doing this kind of intensive, nit-picking, skilled work totally for free is a pretty special thing.

What I do feel kinda' bad about is the way that he has often been "reviled" for deciding to charge for his new efforts.  The reaction seems to run from mild "distaste" to outright "hatred".  It is very sad to see.... and I sincerely hope that in the future if and when you decide to make some sort of changes in what you are doing....... like maybe finally quit doing it at all, if nothing else.... that you don't recieve the same kind of "barbs".

I just followed the link on your post to your website.  Nice setup.  I noticed that you have a Paypal "Donations" button on your website.  So in a sense you are in the same place he was for a long time with regard to that whole idea  ;).  It will be interesting to see how many donations you ever get to kinda' compare your experience to his.

Your "glass cockpit" stuff looks very nice too.  I am working on setting up a simulated cockpit right now.  (See the thread "Homebrew Cockpits" in the General Forum section here........ I just posted a bunch of new construction pictures there today.)

best,

.....................john

[DC10fser]

Hi All,

I have found that with FS2K4 and Pete's 3.0, I have no sound.  Period.  As soon as I uninstalled it, sound comes back.  But, that is the free version w/out registering it.  Earlier versions are incompatible as your FS2k4 will kindly tell you.  Cool!  

I too believe in Pete'w work and I don't think there is any question as to it's merits and quality.  If he wants to charge for it, that is his perogative.  If we want to pay or perhaps are "able" to pay, we will.  We all must remember that some of us are pushing it just keeping up with the new FS software and the hardware to run it.

Sure, I'm looking for freeware.  It's all I can afford.

So, is the conclusion that the freeware software replacement is providing a level of compatability with a/c and such as Pete's older versions?  I just miss the battery switch...   I just hope that designers will let us know if Pete's FSUIPC 3.0 is neccessary for their a/c, panel or whatever?  I hope so!!  

The above post is very interesting and I had no idea that it was FSUIPC, at times, holding all things together in my FS environment with just about any a/c in 2K2...
For now it's just 2K4 straight up with no FSUIPC (cos I want my sound) and I would be interested in hearing more of your experiences with the FDS Connection.

Or, are you finding we must have this payware version of Pete's?

Thanks,  

Britton

[cleobis]

hi, I agree that  pete did a fantastic job the past few years, and still does, but I've just spend around 500

[DC10fser]

Amen Cleobis!!

[quote]hi, I agree that

[JBaymore]

If pete and other people (I'm talking mostly about pete because his program made us dependant !) want to be paid, why don't they try to reach an agreement with mmicrosoft, so that fsuipc would be a default fs application?

Because Microsoft would try to pay Pete next to nothing.... take it or leave it.  

I am sure that Microsoft itself could develop this capability in the software if they wanted to.  No one knows the code better  ;).

This really is very simple when you cut to the chase...... if you want FSUIPC for the new stuff... you pay for it.  If you want FSDConnect.... you download it and it is free.  If something does not work with one or the other...... you decide how much you want it....and then you get the other one.  Or you don;t use the thing that doesn't work.

best,

...................john

[TFlash]

Hello to all fellow simmers! Though I have never used Pete's FSUIPC program,it seems to be a rather IMPORTANT add-on to the world of simmers.It also seems to follow the lead of other developements on the the Internet these days! Develope a program/software that gathers a  following/dependence on,then slap a price tag on it! Not to diminish the effort or expertise of these guys,but the intention to charge should be made outright.We are a COMMUNITY of simmers and everybody should contribute what they CAN. Not in $$$,but in knowledge. Payware belongs in a store,Communityware belongs in these Forums. My 2 cents.