On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 21:02, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 19:18:26 -0600, > "Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > They say some nice things in there too, and we need to stand up and > > take our criticism like adults, they clearly spent quite a bit of > > time investigating FlightGear ... > > ..I'll ask and cc here, look for "http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/"; > in the "Subject: " header.
You're all taking this rather well, as far as I can tell... Thanks to Star Office 6 I was able to go through the slides, but most of it is repeated on the web site anyway. I am sure Open Office will have little problem opening it too. "Overall the system structure and coding is poor - and reflects the checkered and disrupted development history" I think they need to get the CVS version...But, they have not had complete access to commercial designs it seems, similer things happen there (case in point, Duke Nuke'm Forever). "Documentation is poor and in many cases non-existent." What documentation are they referring to exactly? "Any significant system changes or adaptations require C++ and Unix skill" Not sure I understand this? Did they have to install a new kernel or new glibc? "Adapting the system for more general use (e.g. multi-user/network simulation would be difficult and would require major rewrite." Really? How is multiplot working? They are looking for a comparison to MSFS 2002 imho. "Strongly linked to the Unix/C++ development environment - limits broader appeal." Thought it was one standard still used quite a bit Unix/C++ makes a powerful environment. "The system is difficult to work with due to the lack of a maintenance/management front-end. Tasks like adding and animating aircraft models; adding scenery etc. are difficult and fiddly." May have a point there at this time, however I am not holding this against FG as its still beta...Actually they made no point of its beta status. Its been left with one positive slide and one negative, should have ended with an errata. Personal thoughts: Where is that Hurricane? Looks like a potentially good model. Perhaps they should have waited until version 1.0 of Flight Gear came out and waited for a binary... -- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
