RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: X-Plane on Linux
Melchior FRANZ writes: > > * Arthur Wiebe -- Monday 08 November 2004 19:13: > > Just to make myself more clear. I like FlightGear. It's a great > > simulator. I just like X-Plane better because it's of better quality > > and a more mature product. > > Better quality is still quite vague for people who don't know X-Plane. > Overall better quality? FDM? ATC? Weather (rain/snow/hail/lightning)? > Scenery? Better GUI? Hey, but they can't beat fgfs' property system, > its many network/io options. Built-in http server ... :-) PLEASE do **not** reply to this message < can't resist > What is the best text editor nowadays ? Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: X-Plane on Linux
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:42:37 +0100, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Curtis L. Olson -- Monday 08 November 2004 16:22: > > To be fair, X-Plane does some things that are a lot nicer than FG. > > Also, our Mac support is woefully inadequate (mostly because we have > > precious few Mac developers on board.) The original poster was > > referencing the Mac platform and I think his comments were entirely fair. > > Ah, OK. Didn't relate this to the Mac port. At first this looked like > the classical troll post: go to an application specific forum, tell > how this app sucks and how others are better (which so far would be > OK) but then do not describe what exactly are the reasons for this > conclusion. Yes, fgfs' Mac incarnation may be less than optimal, but > that's only because the Apple users don't care much for FlightGear. :-) > > m. > Just to make myself more clear. I like FlightGear. It's a great simulator. I just like X-Plane better because it's of better quality and a more mature product. Especially on OSX :) The fact that I can't build the latest source without problems I don't know how to fix just adds to the reasons but is not the reason. Once I get everything building I will make my builds available online for OSX. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: X-Plane on Linux
Yes, but for a few X-Plane 8 betas the demo lasted 20 min. On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 13:28:37 -0200, Andreas Hasenack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It will indeed be interesting to see how X plane performs on linux. > > Regarding the 6min limit, it was always there on the demo. > > > > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel > 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d > -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
If in doubt ... (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: X-Plane on Linux)
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:42:37 +0100, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah, OK. Didn't relate this to the Mac port. At first this looked like > the classical troll post: go to an application specific forum, tell > how this app sucks and how others are better (which so far would be > OK) but then do not describe what exactly are the reasons for this > conclusion. Yes, fgfs' Mac incarnation may be less than optimal, but > that's only because the Apple users don't care much for FlightGear. :-) The goal of a troll is to make people overreact, so staying reasonable, calm, and polite is always the right choice. If we assume that a person is not a troll and it turns out that a person is, then there's little or no real harm done -- we look good and the troll strikes out. There's nothing wrong with asking polite, probing questions, of course (i.e. "what version are you using?", "can you list the compiler output?", etc.). If we assume that a person *is* a troll and it turns out that a person is not, then we look defensive and immature. Let's always give new posters the benefit of a doubt unless they're way over the top (i.e. "Die @[EMAIL PROTECTED]@% gay commie al quaida scum!!!"), and in such a case, let's just ignore them. All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: X-Plane on Linux
It will indeed be interesting to see how X plane performs on linux. Regarding the 6min limit, it was always there on the demo. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: X-Plane on Linux
Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Arthur Wiebe -- Monday 08 November 2004 15:55: I like FlightGear because it's open source but other than that X-Plane is a lot better. Hopefully in the future I'll actually be able to do a full build of FGFS without so many problems. :) So, X-Plane is better than fgfs, because *you* have problems compiling fgfs!? Now, that seems like a very objective and mature attitude. To be fair, X-Plane does some things that are a lot nicer than FG. Also, our Mac support is woefully inadequate (mostly because we have precious few Mac developers on board.) The original poster was referencing the Mac platform and I think his comments were entirely fair. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
