Christian Mayer wrote:
The first point is argueable. But that we need a restart just to change
planes is a big show stopper!
It depends on the goals for 1.0. If you want a version that is easy to
use for the end user then you might be right. If v1.0 is aimed for a
completely working standalone si
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Giles Robertson schrieb:
> 1) Fgrun/fgfs.
> For the average windows user, this is *highly* counterintuitive. In so
> far as Windows has an overarching user interface and tool design
> philosophy, it's integration. The concept of a GUI that launches the
On Thursday, 20 January 2005 19:49, Giles Robertson wrote:
> 1) Fgrun/fgfs.
> For the average windows user, this is *highly* counterintuitive. In so
> far as Windows has an overarching user interface and tool design
> philosophy, it's integration. The concept of a GUI that launches the
> program do
>
> 3) ATC/AI
> This may just be my group of friends :P, but many of them find it much
> more fun and interesting if there are other aircraft in the world, and
> if they can communicate with ATC. Durk's work in this area is making
> this easier, but ATC itself can still feel quite primitive. Couple
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've tried introducing a few friends to Flightgear. They are mostly
Windows users, technically competent but not adept, who have had
experience of video games and possibly other flight simulators. I
thought I'd muse a bit on the following points, becau
On Thursday 20 Jan 2005 15:38, Jon Berndt wrote:
> I hear you. Coincidentally, I was thinking of this last night: what do we
> (JSBSim) need to do before we finally call it a production 1.0 release? The
> gear problem is the first thing I thought of, as well. Right now I am so
> focused on getting
> Let me steer this discussion in another direction ...
>
> I would really love to start talking about doing a v1.0 release of
> FlightGear ... maybe this spring or early summer. There are a couple
>
> 3. Fix the JSBsim low speed gear jitters. Here's my one and only *big*
> gripe about JSBsim ...