IMHO there is a lot of people (including myself) that are still using "the competitor" just because it can be managed via remote
There are people that might do this kind of reasoning, but I wouldn't say they are "a lot". First, because those needing remote control are already a minority in the first place.
And, of this minority, not all refuse to use GSX because of this, simply because they will still have to use GSX anyway, if the airport is not supported by AES and, having an airport working, even without being remotely controllable, it's surely better than having no supported airport at all.
However, note that I purposely used the term "API for developers", which will make possible to write a remote control application.
Never said anything about providing such application ourselves as part of GSX, with an API someone might use it to do a remote control application, someone else might use it to delegate GSX control to a virtual copilot, someone else might want something we don't even anticipated yet, there's no way we could support all kind of scenarios ourselves, we'd rather concentrate on GSX core functions, with the rest possibly be made by developers using a published API.
