FSDreamTeam forum
Developer's Backdoor => GSX Backdoor => Topic started by: torsten on February 11, 2019, 09:35:07 pm
-
Hello,
sometimes the Wingwalker is on the wrong side of the Airplane.
As far as i have seen on different Airports, he takes all the time the shortest way.
So he takes the inside of the curve to walk.
-
There's nothing in the GSX code that tries to evaluate the shortest walking path.
-
O then tell your developer to include something like that, because walking on the wrong side is very unrealistic.
That could not be sooo complicated.
-
We are working on far more important things that this incredibly minor detail.
-
Oh yes there are a very lot other things to fix and update, nut
even i would not call this bug minor!
If you do this in real, you will maybe lost your job.
-
Oh yes there are a very lot other things to fix and update, nut
even i would not call this bug minor!
If you do this in real, you will maybe lost your job.
Why don't you stop with all these niggling complaints and ridiculous suggestions and leave Umberto and his team to get on with important updates that will benefit all users?
(Wirklich peinlich).
Eisbahn
-
Oh yes there are a very lot other things to fix and update, nut
even i would not call this bug minor!
If you do this in real, you will maybe lost your job.
Why don't you stop with all these niggling complaints and ridiculous suggestions and leave Umberto and his team to get on with important updates that will benefit all users?
(Wirklich peinlich).
Eisbahn
I think it is embarrasing to protect the developer as a paying customer. It is not a gift we get but a product we buy and it was great when we could give inputs before.
I loved GSX long time but since the last months, even though there was a great breakthrough with GSX2, it has faults who diminish my pleasure using it and Umberto does not want to hear it anymore. It's a shame.
-
I think it is embarrasing to protect the developer as a paying customer. It is not a gift we get but a product we buy and it was great when we could give inputs before.
I loved GSX long time but since the last months, even though there was a great breakthrough with GSX2, it has faults who diminish my pleasure using it and Umberto does not want to hear it anymore. It's a shame.
you are soo right.
But i think virtuali has no longer a programmer for gsx, he is maybe not a programmer.
Remember, the lst update was on 7th Dezember.
Also there are sooo many requests and error reports from other user which are not implementet and not solved !
Also it seams he has no idea of the ops on a Airport.
-
But i think virtuali has no longer a programmer for gsx, he is maybe not a programmer.
You don't have the slightest idea how what you are talking about. Really.
Just stop making such useless comments, because while I'm "surely" have "no idea" on airport operations, you don't seem to have the faintest idea of what making a software means.
"the last update was on 7th December" ? And that what's exactly is supposed to mean, other than we have been working very hard for the past 2 months to do the next update, which will cover things WAY more important that the nitpicks you continue to suggest ?
And yes, all WE GSX programmers (there are several, including me), are quite annoyed after working late hours each day for the past 2 months, to have just been labeled as "non existent"...
Maybe, if you stopped making losing my time on the forum replying to your all your minor issues which are NOT even bugs, the next update might have come sooner.
-
it has faults who diminish my pleasure using it and Umberto does not want to hear it anymore. It's a shame.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong again.
The only faults that are not solved are only the one that are not properly reported. A proper reproducible report is the best way to ensure a problem will be fixed. Do you even know what happens when an user make a report ? This:
- Before replying, I try to replicate the problem, with the (usually) limited information provided. Because, 95% of the time, a post fails to include important data like the airport used, the airplane used, the gate used, if the airport is default, if it's not who made it, if it's customized by GSX and if it is, who made the customization and how, if the airplane is customized or not and how, if it's using the default GSX configuration or not, the precise, exact, sequence of operations chosen.
Not a single time, I ever found a post made this way, but that doesn't stop me from going through EACH SINGLE POST, and trying to replicate the problem with what is almost invariably partial information. For example, if the problem involved the airport customization, I would never be able to replicate the problem unless I either had that customization, or at least a description of what has been changed. But this almost never happen.
So, usually, I find myself unable to replicate the problem, so I reply asking for further information, which usually doesn't come.
I can assure you that 100% of the problems that we could replicate, has ALL been fixed, because being able to replicate a problem is the ONLY way we can fix it, but it's also ENSURE it will be dealt with.
Now, there are some problems we are fully aware of, like the issue with KCLT/KSDF and the new SODE, and many other things that has been reported here, which has been already fixed, but we already explained, so many times already, we cannot just push a quick fix NOW, because we changed almost *everything* in the very structure of the GSX installation, because of the replacement with totally new models with PBR (not just new textures, but entirely remade models and animations too ), we rewrote the Live Update FROM SCRATCH, to make it faster, so we had so many changes, and we are ALSO working on totally new service vehicles, that it's so much new stuff (the installer size will probably double in size), making this FREE UPDATE almost bigger than the whole GSX L2 expansion, so we cannot just publish the small fixes until it's all done AND TESTED.
Because I know perfectly well what will happen: those complaining about "no updates for the past 2 months", will be the same complaining about "why you released it before testing it ?"
So I'm sorry but, this time we'll go through a proper Beta testing period (we are in Beta testing already, since more than a month), and we'll probably have a Public Beta too, as soon at least all the new vehicles are ready.
-
Ahh, this should be a WARNING for all other users who just says the Truth.
I can not count anymore the Issues and requests which are not implementet jet
and maybe never.
-
Ahh, this should be a WARNING for all other users who just says the Truth.
I can not count anymore the Issues and requests which are not implementet jet
and maybe never.
Dude, you saying "TRUTH!!!" after every post doesn't really make it so.
They do whatever they can with the informations they get. I highly doubt any of the team enjoys being bombarded by countless threads as much as you enjoy complaining.
-
Ahh, this should be a WARNING for all other users who just says the Truth.
I can not count anymore the Issues and requests which are not implementet jet
and maybe never.
Well as I see it: We all could test GSX 2 on several Airports before buying it. So we knew what we will get. I think It's very cool (and appreciated by most of the people here) that Virtualy takes our further wishes and feedback into account. But they are not obliged to. You did buy the licence for a program, you did not buy the company and are not in the position to give them orders.
Virtualy has prooved that they listen to customers. And developing a software that complex is not easy, it's always a hard decision when it's the right time to release new features. So I for myself am very happy and think they do a great job, caring for customers here in the forum while trying to repair and enhance things in a way that does not bring up 7 new errors for one fixed.
So I am very happy, of course i would love to see whats going on, but i am sure it will be released as soon as it's safe and worth a release.
-
1. remember, the last update was at 7th december !!
Then i just had a short look in the Forum for rejected requests:
1. GPU Request by Markoz : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7114.msg60080.html#msg60080
2. Roller Board luggage by rcoultas62 : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19584.0.html
3. requests without any answer: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19151.0.html
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19151.0.html
4. Here he dont unerstand, that this message is absolutely nonsense, why is GSX saying that ??? : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,17642.0.html
5. http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,16335.0.html
6. i read anywhere in the Forum about the Luggage dollies, which are filled when you start DEBOARDING...and also
if you start a flight at any Position ( not a Turnarround ), as we all do most of the times i think, they are going away first and
come back to load the luggage in the airplane. Absolutely nonsense.
Then also the asking at every start if we want to start the engines and you have every time to answer NOOOOOO....
Just a little option in the GSX Setup or GSX Aircraft Setup would help to eliminate thi stupid question.
i forgot one: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,18453.0.html
and so on and so on ..... the list has no end
-
1. remember, the last update was at 7th december !!
Then i just had a short look in the Forum for rejected requests:
1. GPU Request by Markoz : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7114.msg60080.html#msg60080
2. Roller Board luggage by rcoultas62 : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19584.0.html
3. requests without any answer: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19151.0.html
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19151.0.html
4. Here he dont unerstand, that this message is absolutely nonsense, why is GSX saying that ??? : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,17642.0.html
5. http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,16335.0.html
6. i read anywhere in the Forum about the Luggage dollies, which are filled when you start DEBOARDING...and also
if you start a flight at any Position ( not a Turnarround ), as we all do most of the times i think, they are going away first and
come back to load the luggage in the airplane. Absolutely nonsense.
Then also the asking at every start if we want to start the engines and you have every time to answer NOOOOOO....
Just a little option in the GSX Setup or GSX Aircraft Setup would help to eliminate thi stupid question.
i forgot one: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,18453.0.html
and so on and so on ..... the list has no end
Umberto please block this idiot!
-
I rest my case. nobody is forced to use the software if he doesn't like it.
And i think you'll find more companys that never do updates at all than ones that do them constantly. And December 7th is not that long ago, what makes you think you are legitimated to more updates? It has never been writen anywhere.
Really, mabe it would be best to close this topic, as it would lead nowhere.
-
I never say i dont like the Software.
I dont like how the Requests and issues are handled, that is a big difference.
-
Just have a look at the initial setup for any aircraft on any airport. The push back truck stands inside the baggage train. If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.
If I ask to place the initial positions better, you say, I could change it myself on every of the 50000 airports. It's such an obvious bug, if vehicles already sit on each other initially. Do the beta testers not see this?
Another example. I asked for a pushback truck disable check box. The question was why. Because there are a lot of stands, that don't need pushback and it is more realistic to not have it there. No further answer to this. Just got ignored.
-
My compliments, you managed to be wrong on each single of your arguments. Let's see:
1. GPU Request by Markoz : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7114.msg60080.html#msg60080
A message from 2012!! We later confirmed the GPU WILL come!
2. Roller Board luggage by rcoultas62 : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19584.0.html
As explained, so many times already, it's very possible some message might be missing. Sometimes it's just the fact I log from different computers, or even my phone (BECAUSE I ALWAYS CHECK THE FORUM, EVEN WHEN I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO, like on Vacations, Weekends, etc.), which might result in missing a few message, since the local cookie on each system might not match.
3. requests without any answer: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19151.0.html
Neither the question, nor the anwer, was required here, since GSX ALREADY HAS that feature, the Jetway GPU unit (which obviously makes the external GPU less required), that charges the Battery on default airplanes, and 3rd party airplanes with a simulator of External power already know how to interface with it.
4. Here he dont unerstand, that this message is absolutely nonsense, why is GSX saying that ??? : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,17642.0.html
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but, I asked clarifications about what those acronyms which referred to 3rd party products really meant, and asked more details about the problem, but the user never came back so, it WAS an "unanswered" post, but NOT by me!
5. http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,16335.0.html
And what, exactly, are you trying to say here ? Rob asked for what he acknowledge as a non realistic procedure, just to make life easier for video editors to work more quickly. Do you find this to be a GSX "bug" or something that should have an higher priority ?
6. i read anywhere in the Forum about the Luggage dollies, which are filled when you start DEBOARDING...
Confirmed so many times already the Baggage Loader, which is the first service we made for GSX, is quote old and WILL be remade. But again, that's just a cosmetic issue. Your ability to care for the minor things seems to be unequalled.
f you start a flight at any Position ( not a Turnarround ), as we all do most of the times i think, they are going away first and come back to load the luggage in the airplane. Absolutely nonsense
I already explained SO MANY TIMES TO YOU, which this is CORRECT and it's NOT "nonsense". Please stop calling that, just because you don't understand the explanation I gave you so many times.
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,18453.0.html
Not sure what's more to add, other to repeat that water/lavatory vehicles will come. Why you think there's already an option to configure their points in the airplane editor ?
and so on and so on ..... the list has no end
Sorry, but making a list of wrong points, doesn't make it any useful for anybody.
-
Just have a look at the initial setup for any aircraft on any airport. The push back truck stands inside the baggage train. If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.
It surely doesn't start there.
The default placement, if an airport hasn't been customized by the user, is to have the Pushback on the LEFT side of the airplane (looking from behind), angled 90 degree with the parking, and the Baggage Trains on the RIGHT side of the plane so no, they don't clash with each other.
If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.
It hasn't. We changed the position of the Baggage *loaders*, but even more on the right (so it's really impossible they would clash with the Pushback), but the position of the Baggage Trains hasn't changed.
If I ask to place the initial positions better, you say, I could change it myself on every of the 50000 airports. It's such an obvious bug, if vehicles already sit on each other initially. Do the beta testers not see this?
They haven't, since it clearly doesn't happen. Check if you are using an airport customization. If the user (or whoever made it) customized the position in a certain way, GSX will use it as it is, regardless how silly it might be.
Another example. I asked for a pushback truck disable check box. The question was why. Because there are a lot of stands, that don't need pushback and it is more realistic to not have it there. No further answer to this. Just got ignored.
You can use the scenery customization to place the truck in a different place, possibly even in another parking, and just NOT call the Pushback.
Before, GSX used to read the AFCAD and, if the scenery was set to "None", it didn't allow Pushback there, for the precise reason that some parking don't allow pushback. But many 3rd party developers are lazy, and don't set the Pushback preference, even when Pushback IS needed so, how GSX could known the difference ?
This is of course clearly explained on the manual, that's why there's an option to OVERRIDE the Pushback preference. This is how GSX always was, but a certain point USERS asked to always have a Straight pushback OPTION, even when the parking was flagged as "None" Pushback, so we added that option which, of course, means that by default, we should create the Pushback truck in all cases.
-
Man, I can only commend Umberto for being THIS patient with people. Really have the patience of a saint.
-
Just have a look at the initial setup for any aircraft on any airport. The push back truck stands inside the baggage train. If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.
If I ask to place the initial positions better, you say, I could change it myself on every of the 50000 airports. It's such an obvious bug, if vehicles already sit on each other initially. Do the beta testers not see this?
Another example. I asked for a pushback truck disable check box. The question was why. Because there are a lot of stands, that don't need pushback and it is more realistic to not have it there. No further answer to this. Just got ignored.
you speak exactly my words ... and the Answers was exactly what i expect
-
you speak exactly my words ... and the Answers was exactly what i expect
Except what he reported doesn't happen, and if with "the Answers was exactly what i expect" you meant I always reply with the correct answers to every problem reported (which is not even a problem, as it usually is), then yes, it was exactly as you expected.
-
Correct. No more words needed, waste of time.
-
Correct. No more words needed, waste of time.
You posted a list of problems that supposedly happen in GSX.
I replied by saying they don't, if you don't agree, you should reply when exactly they happen to you, so we can check if it's really a problem of GSX, or it was (as I already explained), some issue with an airport customization done badly, which is the likely explanation for what you reported, the baggage loaders supposedly clashing with the pushback which, by default, is not possible, since they are placed on opposite sides of the parking.
That's called checking facts using a scientific method, and I'm sure that, if you filed a proper report of the case (instead of just saying GSX has a bug), we would understand why it's happening to you, and as usual, if it *really* was a GSX "bug", it would be fixed.
Instead, you continue arguing and yes, that's a "waste of time", because by not providing any data or evidence to replicate a problem, it's not even possible to BEGIN to understand what's happening, and if it is a bug indeed. AFTER (not before), we'll establish it's really a bug, it will be fixed. Assuming it is.