AirNav Systems Forum
AirNav RadarBox and RadarBox24.com => AirNav RadarBox and RadarBox24.com Discussion => Topic started by: RodBearden on June 26, 2009, 01:10:16 AM
-
HadNav - the closed beta testing worked fine - we picked up a lot of bugs, and suggested improvements, many of which were acted on.
If you want a stable, relatively bug-free system, don't bother with beta versions - they are, by their very nature, designed to find problems and stimulate ideas. I wouldn't even contemplate trying the Windows 7 beta, but I'm happy to play with the RadarBox Beta because I love the system and care about its future.
Anyone who downloads a beta version of any software should tolerate problems, and deal with them constructively, and not criticise the developers when problems occur. Beta users are there to help, essentially becoming part of the development team.
If you had had to pay for the beta version, I would understand you grumbling about it. But even the final version will be a free upgrade - try getting the same deal from Microsoft! It's fine that you have decided to go back to version 2, but I hope that all the beta users will, as is generally the case so far, be constructive in our attempts to improve what is already a great system.
Just my opinion :-)
Rod
-
Since no response of a update 3.0 exe file on the 25th from AirNav Dev or Support.
I will also go back to 2.01 software. Too many bugs to stay with the 3.0 first release.
I can't baby sit it all day. To make sure it doesn't stop responding.
They should get a new beta team next time. That will do some rigorous testing.
A good beta tester will actually try to find bugs/errors in the software by trying different combinations, or make sure the help file/FAQ pages is updated for 3.0
HadNav
I have gone back to 2.01.
V3 Beta is too flakey for me at the moment. It needs a major update!
The closed beta test obviously didn't work!
-
I'm sure other users were waiting around on the 25th. To update the beta 3.0 version with a newer release. No word from AirNav on a newer release date. Us public beta users shouldn't have to ask for a updated release date. AirNav should just update us without asking. We are here to help. Don't make us ask for a update on a new release date.
RodBearden
Anyone who downloads a beta version of any software should tolerate problems, and deal with them constructively, and not criticise the developers when problems occur. Beta users are there to help, essentially becoming part of the development team.
Rod
-
I stand by what I have said. This issue seems a bit Alpha. Alerts worked in 2.01 but no longer work in V3 beta! How did that get past a closed beta test? I have been involved in beta tests in the past. Tivo - when they were last involved in the UK. We were set test questions! And discussed in a beta test separate forum, which is what is needed here at Airnav forums. It was open to other users!
We were all originally expecting 2.10 not V3 beta!
-
The developers at Airnav are working hard to resolve these issues. Looking at previous version update threads on this forum Airnav were under pressure to release the beta so everyone could have a play but if you want stability then it is best to stay with the official release.
-
EMA we were expecting 2.10 not a v3 beta that hadn't until now received peer pressure from users!
-
I understand your frustration but you did say in a previous post
How many ticks in this countdown to V3.0 public beta or full release? Testing a beta with a few people doesn't catch many bugs!
Now they have opened up the Beta people have the choice to test it or remain with the official release.
I am sure Microsoft will have fun with Windows 7 :-)
-
Any update when it's going be release around the 25th ?
AirNav Development
PS: we will try to have a new exe ready by Jun 25.
AirNav are going to regret setting a date for this...don't you ever learn Support? ;^)
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
It's beta software - it will have bugs and it might have bugs that weren't in the previous version. Anybody who has been involved in software production will be only too familiar with this fact - it's the nature of the beast.
As for the name - V2.1 or V3.0 - I can't see why people are getting so hung up on this. I could have been called 'Fish' for all the difference this makes - lol
The beta works great on my desktop and laptop. It's quicker and displays more aircraft, so progress is being made. It's only when you release software to the wider community that the testing really starts. I see also that the beta testing team are under attack too - as I've said before, some people you just can't please :-(
-
Any update when it's going be release around the 25th ?
AirNav Development
PS: we will try to have a new exe ready by Jun 25.
AirNav are going to regret setting a date for this...don't you ever learn Support? ;^)
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
I read it as they will TRY that is not really a commitment, but as Allocator says you cannot please everyone. Hopefully it will not be too long I know the plotting of aircraft is fixed so we are moving forward.
-
It's beta software - it will have bugs and it might have bugs that weren't in the previous version. Anybody who has been involved in software production will be only too familiar with this fact - it's the nature of the beast.
Hi Allocator,
I totaly agree with you! Beta software = testsoftware too. You must always espect that it is possible that bugs are in ore some other errors. If people do not like that they should not use the beta software and wait for the final version.
With me in general the version 3.0 is working, much quicker and displays much more aircraft as well. Bugs I have seen did I report to support allready and they are working on it.
-
Posted by: RodBearden
Insert Quote
HadNav - the closed beta testing worked fine - we picked up a lot of bugs, and suggested improvements, many of which were acted on.
If you want a stable, relatively bug-free system, don't bother with beta versions - they are, by their very nature, designed to find problems and stimulate ideas. I wouldn't even contemplate trying the Windows 7 beta, but I'm happy to play with the RadarBox Beta because I love the system and care about its future.
Anyone who downloads a beta version of any software should tolerate problems, and deal with them constructively, and not criticise the developers when problems occur. Beta users are there to help, essentially becoming part of the development team.
If you had had to pay for the beta version, I would understand you grumbling about it. But even the final version will be a free upgrade - try getting the same deal from Microsoft! It's fine that you have decided to go back to version 2, but I hope that all the beta users will, as is generally the case so far, be constructive in our attempts to improve what is already a great system.
Just my opinion :-)
I Second this
It's beta software - it will have bugs and it might have bugs that weren't in the previous version. Anybody who has been involved in software production will be only too familiar with this fact - it's the nature of the beast.
As for the name - V2.1 or V3.0 - I can't see why people are getting so hung up on this. I could have been called 'Fish' for all the difference this makes - lol
I Second this too
Just let AirNav get on with what they are doing, they are working hard on behalf of all of us. Those of you, who think you are getting a rough deal - thank god you don't have a SBS.
-
We can only stress this is a beta version so expect issues. This is not a full release, anyone thinking it is and replying to posts like it isn't helping anything.
The closed beta testers have appeared on the forum and have backed up there testing. This is just the nature of beta testing thats bugs are sometimes only found when lots of users are testing it trying different usage patterns. The new update is being worked on and as EMA mentioned there has been test patches send out to a few customers so work is being done. We hope to have an update late next week, again that depends on whether the mini pacthes get the thumbs up.
We do thank customers for testing the beta version and helping us.
P.S Just a side note we are still being "attacked" by people who are trying to undermine RadarBox & AirNav (usually jealous competitors). CowboyNut who posted earlier in this thread is one of these people (he signed up under this username after his old username was banned after continual attacks, spam and false comments) Please be aware of this.
-
Airnav
The genuine users/supports are right behind you and appreciate all the hard work being carried out. I think we have spotted certain people, and the tone of replies to them seems to reflect this.
Just keep up the excellent work, we are right behind you.
-
overall, i'm verry pleased with V3.0 ; much faster on my laptop then V2.1
only with the FIX stations i have a real problem, can't use them anymore as there are simply to much of them, but this has been said several times before, so i hope this will be FIXed in a further update.
one strange thing i want to report : to show the Custom legend on the map, i have to UNSELECT "Draw Home Location Legend" !? otherwise the custom text i have in that list get superposed over the standard "Home" text, with the custom box unselected, i get the custom text on the map and "Home" dissapers.
i only got the custom text working after i saw the tip about the decimal setting in configuration, so thanks for that.
-
Some of the comments on here defy belief.
Do the posters on here understand exactly what a beta is, or realise the amount of programming required to acheive even a minor change to any software ?
Some comments have been spiteful, rude or unhelpful, rather than trying to achieve a better product by feeding back constructive comments.
Gentlemen, it is a FREE Beta; it's cost you nothing. If you can't understand the basic concept of Beta testing, then uninstall it and wait for the public update; give AirNav a break and some breathing space !
Sorry - just my 2p Worth....
-
even with the odd niggle beta 3 is better than v2 ....just the fact its quicker outweighs all else !
thumbs up to airnav !
-
i think its a fantastic update, the extra flight id`s is a massive improvement
Mark
-
An additon to the 'Low' bug list:
F9 key
The tools menu states the F9 key to call up the Myflight tab, but has no function.
Remark
The current online help manual says that the F9 key is assigned to call the 'Avoid overlap funtion' and F10 to call the 'Avoid navigational aids overlap'. I assume both functions happen automatically in the current software version, without need of manual initiation. That's why those two key assignments are used otherwise now: F9-MyFlights, F10-Network. Anyone please correct me if I am wrong on that.
-
I think you are correct, Vruma.
I've been nagging Development for ages about that. My nagging eventually got us the +/- keys for map zooming, so we might get F9 working sometime as well ;-)
Rod
-
An additon to the 'Low' bug list:
F9 key
The tools menu states the F9 key to call up the Myflight tab, but has no function.
Remark
The current online help manual says that the F9 key is assigned to call the 'Avoid overlap funtion' and F10 to call the 'Avoid navigational aids overlap'. I assume both functions happen automatically in the current software version, without need of manual initiation. That's why those two key assignments are used otherwise now: F9-MyFlights, F10-Network. Anyone please correct me if I am wrong on that.
hi all
if i press f9 i get more aircraft must be overlap.
from pat using V3.0
-
Odd behavior just noticed: if you sort by ModeS and select a flight that subsequently times-out, the selected aircraft jumps and the list scrolls far away from where you were watching. this is annoying if, for instance, you're wanting to keep a watch on a particular section of codes, like the border between one range and another. Can't it just stay approximately where it was?
-
how about releasing something that makes radar box runs on vista 64 bit first :) please please! been waiting for so long support! You gotta at least give us that and we can help with reporting issues with beta also. It's frustrating not being able to even install radar box.
-
They should get a new beta team next time. That will do some rigorous testing.
We tested what we were told was in the beta. And regression tested. I had no problems. Maybe you'd have liked to spend hours diagnosing and helping develop the logic to received non-ADS/B FlightIDs. Sorry, but you touched a nerve with that swipe at beta testers :(
And I was in such a good mood as well, having got back from 2 days on the north Sutherland coast in blazing sunshine.
-
Tarbat,
I think that it has been established that CowboyNut was one of the trouble makers from before who had been banned, then registered under another name - hence the 18 Jun joining date and only 7 posts!
So, don't loose any sleep over it, he was just trying to wind people up :-(
-
Tarbat
You should know that you are a respected member of this forum, it is easy to see who wants to help and those that only complain. Thats forums for you ;-)
-
I stand by what I have said. This issue seems a bit Alpha. Alerts worked in 2.01 but no longer work in V3 beta! How did that get past a closed beta test?
It didn't. They knew about it. I reported it :-) I imagine that since the software was going to be launched as a beta that they would take care of it at a later date and have even a larger user base give feedback about the software and get a more complete and comprehensive view of the issues, which does makes sense. After all who would ever go and install a beta and expect to have a stable system? I had a chance to see what one might consider Alpha and what you see now is no comparison to that. The new software is great and once all the bug fixes are implemented it's really going to be sweet.
Regards,
Falcon
-
An addition to the bug list:
No search function in the "Airline" section of the filter toolbar
If a criteria is entered into the field "Search for" the list does not update to show the matching entries.
(I'd categorize it minor)
Edit: here's a pic.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2421/3665509408_de390e8b87_m.jpg)
-
As the Airline field is a graphic, I am not surprised that there is not search on it.
The correct text field to search on would be the FlightID, with the generic first 3 characters.
To implement a search on the graphic would require reverse lookups from the logo to the FlightID, and could slow the system!!!!
-
A minor issue that I had discovered in version 2.0 and forgotten about, which I see is also in version 3.0 Beta...If you click the Cancel button on the Welcome dialog (the one with the Start, Account and Cancel buttons on it) then on re-entering the program many of the previously chosen settings have been lost. For example, the Interface panel is now removed, the vertical tracking view F8 flight display reappears, Map/Aviation Signs/Station Labels/Name is now unchecked etc.
This might be desirable in some respects, e.g. "Restore Installation Defaults" (do we have that somewhere?) but at least there should be a warning on the button press.
Another issue following on from the one above: Having never tried Restore Desktop from the Window menu I assumed this would restore my settings to the defaults, so I clicked on it. This blanked my map area to grey and disabled all my toolbars, I also got disconnected from the network ("Get Flights From RadarBox Network" got unchecked). On retrying this the same occurred but I remained connected.
I see now, after reading the manual, that Restore Desktop is to be used in conjunction with, and importantly after Record Desktop. Perhaps in this case Restore Desktop should be greyed until Record Desktop has been selected and as Restore Desktop follows on logically from Record Desktop it should perhaps be below it in the menu.
-
Anyone had any problems with the "Screen Shot Auto FTP Upload"
When the active box is checked - Various times at the bottom of the screen (Same place as Network flight data successfully updated) I am getting FTP upload disconnected. Nothing happening on the web page either.
Andy
-
As the Airline field is a graphic, I am not surprised that there is not search on it.
The correct text field to search on would be the FlightID, with the generic first 3 characters.
To implement a search on the graphic would require reverse lookups from the logo to the FlightID, and could slow the system!!!!
jgrloit,
thanks for commenting my post. However, I dont understand your explanation why this is not a bug and why the airline is a graphic? Are you working with a new beta version I am not aware of? ;O)
The search function is working fine with the other filters on the filters toolbar, Origin, Destination and Airport. So in my view, its a (minor) bug with the airline search function.
-
I think we're talking about two separate fields here - the Airline field is the logo (graphic) and the Company is the text field. Company sorts and filters fine. Airline can't be filtered, and sorting produces results that I don't understand!
HTH
Rod
-
I think that vruma is talking about the Airline BUTTON on the toolbar to the right of 'Start Tour'. He's right, previous selections are not remembered in the drop-down list. I'd not noticed this as I never use it. I always use the Quick Filters.
-
Thats intresting, do you mean not remembered on closing the software and starting or during its session?
-
I think that vruma is talking about the Airline BUTTON on the toolbar to the right of 'Start Tour'. He's right, previous selections are not remembered in the drop-down list. I'd not noticed this as I never use it. I always use the Quick Filters.
Remembers okay for me. I have EZY entered, and it's there on the drop-down list even after restarting. I've found that you need to press the ENTER key when typing in this box to get it to remember what you've entered.
-
Thats intresting, do you mean not remembered on closing the software and starting or during its session?
No, it's not remembered during the session.
Type BAW into the Airline box and click the button - only British Airways aircraft show on the map. Type AFR into the box and Air France aircraft show. Click the down arrow on the drop-down box and it is empty.
It's the same with the Origin, destination and Airport boxes too.
I think that you should end up with all your entries from that session showing in the drop-down, not just the last entry?
-
I think that vruma is talking about the Airline BUTTON on the toolbar to the right of 'Start Tour'. He's right, previous selections are not remembered in the drop-down list. I'd not noticed this as I never use it. I always use the Quick Filters.
Remembers okay for me. I have EZY entered, and it's there on the drop-down list even after restarting. I've found that you need to press the ENTER key when typing in this box to get it to remember what you've entered.
Yep, that works - use Enter and the drop-down is populate. Just click on the button and it isn't.
-
A minor issue that I had discovered in version 2.0 and forgotten about, which I see is also in version 3.0 Beta...If you click the Cancel button on the Welcome dialog (the one with the Start, Account and Cancel buttons on it) then on re-entering the program many of the previously chosen settings have been lost. For example, the Interface panel is now removed, the vertical tracking view F8 flight display reappears, Map/Aviation Signs/Station Labels/Name is now unchecked etc.
Well that's an interesting find Andy,
I have had some instances where RB has started up and had lost most of my preferences and the vertical tracking list has mysteriously disappeared.
I am betting this was related to the fact that I had hit cancel when starting the app - when I ran it again afterwards it started from a default setting.
Doesn't affect me now as I have altered the icon to add the /connect switch. :-)
It was annoying though starting the app only to find all of my alerts gone etc.
Should really be looked at sometime...
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
As I saw it. Version 2.10 was with a closed beta test and release was delayed by this beta test! We the users were told version 2.10 was imminent pending the closed beta peeps replying to latest closed test!
All of a sudden it wasn't a release but an open beta test of V3.
Not very professional beta testing. I know what a beta test is.
The beta testing at Airnav needs a more organised approach.
To break a previously working feature in ver 2.01 beggars belief! How did this get past the closed beta?
-
HadNav - you don't appear to know anything about programming or beta testing. Your comments are not worthy of any other reply.
I do hope that AirNav delete your silly post.
Rod
-
Look at the past posts from Airnav. Version 2.10 release was imminent! Not a V3 beta test. We the users were misled! Were you on the closed beta test Rod?
I know a lot about programming and beta testing.
In a new version of software you launch new features and bug fixes. You don't break what previously worked in an earlier version.
-
Rod, you deem my post silly :) Oh well that's your opinion. I expressed mine! I hope that Airnav are adult enough and democratic not to delete my posts.
-
As I saw it. Version 2.10 was with a closed beta test and release was delayed by this beta test! We the users were told version 2.10 was imminent pending the closed beta peeps replying to latest closed test!
All of a sudden it wasn't a release but an open beta test of V3.
Not very professional beta testing. I know what a beta test is.
The beta testing at Airnav needs a more organised approach.
To break a previously working feature in ver 2.01 beggars belief! How did this get past the closed beta?
It seems to me you saw it all wrong then HadNav.
Why all the fuss about a simple number change??
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=2855.0
Quote; "Note: AirNav Systems renamed this new version to V3.00 to reflect the considerable amount of changes being released." unquote:
Although I would argue that on the surface nothing much seems to have changed in the way of new features I personally feel that AirNav made a rod for their own backs by 'bigging' up this release and also posting release dates but that is just my opinion as I was expecting something more...but as I said I would settle for a version that resolves the slow menu & associated issues that affected a minority of users in lieu of new features and it would appear that I might just get that.
Nothing else has changed...v2.10 was always a closed Beta as has always been the case in the past - with hindsight maybe it would have been better to leave it called v2.10 instead of bumping the revision number to v3.0...
The only difference this time is AirNav decided to release a public Beta as people have been clamouring for...apart from them renaming it from v2.10 to v3.0 this is exactly what happened and they stated this a while ago.
Not misleading...just difficult for some people to realise that v3.0 is really v2.10 - just the version number has changed...
For those of you like Cnut (can I abbreviate your username CowboyNut?) and others who are pissing & moaning it is a Beta version FFS.
Quote from WIKI on software testing;
"Beta testing comes after alpha testing. Versions of the software, known as beta versions, are released to a limited audience outside of the programming team. The software is released to groups of people so that further testing can ensure the product has few faults or bugs. Sometimes, beta versions are made available to the open public to increase the feedback field to a maximal number of future users."
I have always been vocal in criticising AirNav where deserved and this probably will not change but for Gods sake give them a break here.
They responded to requests for users to become involved in a pre-release version whatever it may be called and have done just that.
If you have no desire to take part in Beta testing then please don't.
I for example have not gone anywhere near v3.0 at the moment and am using v2.10 - and believe me I always want the latest & greatest.
I read this thread and took a decision - I am going to let the dust settle and wait until most (if not all) of these reported issues are resolved before I jump in. Probably. ;^)
Others out there would be well advised to do the same if you cannot or will not accept that a Public Beta is by very definition a pre-release test of the software opened up to a wider audience instead of a closed group of users and you will find issues.
The purpose of this thread was so we, the users could post feedback on any issues we found with this public beta should we choose to install it but it is getting bogged down with people bleating instead of offering constructive criticism of issues they may find on their own systems.
Regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
I know a lot about programming and beta testing.
In a new version of software you launch new features and bug fixes. You don't break what previously worked in an earlier version.
You obviously don't understand software development then. Things get broken whenever you change software.
-
The 3.0 public beta users. Should had there own forum area to talk about the beta.
To keep it out of the main RadarBox Discussion forum area. So the 2.0 users didn't have to read all the fuss about 3.0 beta.
-
Just a small note from the development team: let's focus on what is important, software development. In case you haven't noticed: V3.0 was not yet released - only V3.0 Beta. We have collected all reported bugs and we are working on them.
The RadarBox project is growing: we have now more than 3000 users and sales increase month after month.
It is impossible from all these users not to have at least 10 or 20 that will continuously complain about everything, every feature, every change. You cannot please everyone. Not all of them understand about software development. Some of them (not all) are directly or indirectly related to our competitor's product and they "profit" from saying bad things about AirNav.
They repeat themselves daily, create forums, create blogs, damage their boxes 3 or 4 times to report that they have a "static problem" and post the message everytwhere. They even go to several shops to report RadarBox doesn't work.
RadarBox is a new project: when we started we had 0% of the market and they had 100%, now we have 80% and they 20%. This hurts many feelings. We are a young company. We want to win. We are new, most of us aviation professionals and we want to have, year after year, version after version, a better product. We will continue to do so.
-
Good morning. Has any user had any success with using V3 on Vista 64. I know that the programmers are meant looking at this but has anyone managed a work around ? I have never managed to get any version working on V64. I am currently using my box on an old laptop which is not ideal. Any help or advice would be welcome. Thank you.
-
I have never managed to get any version working on V64.
Have you tried the workarounds on this thread - http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=528.msg16574#msg16574
Others have got RB running okay on Vista 64-bit.
-
Thank you will try these.
-
"They repeat themselves daily, create forums, create blogs, damage their boxes 3 or 4 times to report that they have a "static problem" and post the message everytwhere. They even go to several shops to report RadarBox doesn't work"
Yet again, I can't believe what I'm reading in this forum. Airnav, why do you have to keep justifying yourselves continually, and mentioning "competition" all the time?
I've really not seen anything quite like it in all my years of hardware and software use, and corresponding forum memberships.
It's as if you have an inherent terror of something. Your users will either like or dislike your product (or parts of it), and there will always be dissenters for one reason or another. Most of us are intelligent enough to ignore insignificant digs without your uber-defensive position. Some of us have had genuine concerns, and are not accustomed to wasting the time of others.
Please chill, and concentrate on improving the product. (And no, I don't want to be banned again for speaking out...)
DC
-
HadNav: we will not delete your posts (we rarely do so and usually all of them come from the same group of users where you are not included).
From your post above: "As I saw it. Version 2.10 was with a closed beta test and release was delayed by this beta test!"
I'm sorry but you didn't understand it at all...V2.10 was renamed V3.0 because of the huge changes in the application core.
BTW you reported in the past that your menus were slow in the previous versions. They work Ok now. And V3.0 was not yet released - this is a public beta with errors that should be reported by users - exactly what is happening.
And despite these (most of them minor) errors V3.0 is already known to be a total success with improved performance.
-
"Deadcalm": after the private messages we sent you reporting what is going on behind the scenes in the "Virtual Radar" market it is really very strange to, once again, reading a post like the one you have sent.
Are you hiding anything? Sincerely I don't think so. The only reason for your post is that you don't want to understand it. And please don't change the meaning of our words: we know that there are some customers with normal/true complaints. But we also know that there is a group of users that do the above mentioned actions.
"Concentrate on improving the product."
That is exactly what we do - daily.
Just an interesting question: why don't you have the same kind of approach when you participate in our competitors product forum? They haven't released a relevant software upgrade for the last 3 years! Why don't you post a message about this there and 3 out of each 4 messages you send on this forum are to focus on negative things?
Go to their forum, create a post "Why no real software update for the last 3 years?" and post the link here so we all can read their response. We would all be interested in reading it.
-
If AirNav has 80% of the virtual radar market and has sold 3,000 RadarBoxes, that implies the competition has only sold 750 units. I find that hard to believe?
-
The 3.0 public beta users. Should had there own forum area to talk about the beta.
To keep it out of the main RadarBox Discussion forum area. So the 2.0 users didn't have to read all the fuss about 3.0 beta.
Welcome to the forum Shadowman - I see that you joined yesterday. How long have you had your RB and have you played with any of the earlier versions of the software?
-
MikeC: why do you login to this forum with this username and not with your typical "Anmer" username?
For our users to know "Anmer/MikeC" is working very closely with our competitors support area and is the top 5 most frequent posters on their forum. He is directly or indirectly connected to our competitor, has created an external forum where 99% of the messages report problems with RadarBox, most of them false.
You don't need to hide your identity here Mike.
And most of all: he is not a RadarBox user.
-
If AirNav has 80% of the virtual radar market and has sold 3,000 RadarBoxes, that implies the competition has only sold 750 units. I find that hard to believe?
Wrong implication. Airnav claim to have 80% of the current market sales. The competition sold a lot of boxes BEFORE Radarbox was on the market, so have a large number of units already in use. Airnav's claim is that for every 8 boxes sold now, 2 of the competitors boxes are sold.
-
I joined this Forum 2 years ago and have rarely posted, so I'm hardly a troublemaker. I'm not hiding behind any identity and I find it extraordinary that you have just displayed my full name!
Sure I'm an SBS-1 user (and maybe soon and ANRB user too) as are others who post here. Your own Rules do not require members to post their real names or own an ANRB.
Contrary to what you have just posted, I am in no way connected to your competitor, other than as a customer. Maybe you should define what comprises a "connection"?
And again, contrary to another false allegation, I have not created an external forum of any kind. And the one you are referring to (but refuse to mention by name) does not have 99% of messages reporting problems with RadarBox. The site stats which anyone can view will quickly dispel that falshood.
Plus I never suggested I was a RadarBox user. I just pointed out that I find the claim of 80% market share hard to believe. Maybe you should justify that claim?
-
I joined this Forum 2 years ago and have rarely posted, so I'm hardly a troublemaker. I'm not hiding behind any identity and I find it extraordinary that you have just displayed my full name!
Mike, maybe you need to consider a different email address then - when I view your profile, it's a bit of a give-away :-)
I did wonder, 3 posts since you joined the forum in Aug 07.
Also new forum members with almost their first posts being about how the beta testing is all wrong ..... etc. Other new members advising against using the beta release. All a bit strange to me.
Just my 'conspiracy theory' mind running riot again - I'm sure that I'm wrong.
-
I'm not hiding behind any identity and I find it extraordinary that you have just displayed my full name!
Maybe you should tick that box in forum preferences to hide your email address then!!
-
If AirNav has 80% of the virtual radar market and has sold 3,000 RadarBoxes, that implies the competition has only sold 750 units. I find that hard to believe?
Wrong implication. Airnav claim to have 80% of the current market sales. The competition sold a lot of boxes BEFORE Radarbox was on the market, so have a large number of units already in use. Airnav's claim is that for every 8 boxes sold now, 2 of the competitors boxes are sold.
Yesterday's sales, last week's or what?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to see the context of that claim? If it's true, which it may well be, let's understand the detail.
No one would be able to place an advert in the UK without qualifying such a claim.
-
MikeC: why do you login to this forum with this username and not with your typical "Anmer" username?
For our users to know "Anmer" (Mike Cogan is the real name) is working very closely with our competitors support area and is the top 5 most frequent posters on their forum. He is directly or indirectly connected to our competitor, has created an external forum where 99% of the messages report problems with RadarBox, most of them false.
You don't need to hide your identity here Mike.
And most of all: he is not a RadarBox user.
You lot are are really something else, you publish Anmers real name, are you insane or what ?
You wanted me to remove a post from my forum which revealed that Brandao is a 767 pilot because it was revealing personal details, and now you do this, I tell you guys something, you have made a good product but your buisness moral is rock bottom you have been accusing me now for a long time of "working for the competition" and posting such comments as this,
They repeat themselves daily, create forums, create blogs, damage their boxes 3 or 4 times to report that they have a "static problem" and post the message everytwhere. They even go to several shops to report RadarBox doesn't work.
just shows your true colors and how gutless you are, remeber who was a big contributor to all the problems back in March on my forum, your CEO, Brandao under the name of KAITAK.
I would advise you to desist in your accusations, you have now stepped onto very thin ice and I advise to to take a step backwards.
Hamish
-
I really don't take any notice of any of these sales figures no matter what it is being sold. It makes no difference at all to the existing user and and potential new user is going to judge a product on its performance and features, not on how many have been sold.
I've done a bit of worth with statistics recently and I feel sure that I can prove anything to anybody using the same source information - lol
-
OK, here we go again. The usual trouble makers are back!
Give it a rest you lot and leave this forum to those who want to exchange information about the use of RadarBox. Hamish, you've got your own forum so go and play there please.
-
OK, here we go again. The usual trouble makers are back!
Give it a rest you lot and leave this forum to those who want to exchange information about the use of RadarBox. Hamish, you've got your own forum so go and play there please.
I do not get involved on this forum, but I felt that I had to respond, would you deny me that right ??
-
And, I am not nor ever have been a trouble maker.
-
And, I am not nor ever have been a trouble maker.
Good - cheerio!
-
You wanted me to remove a post from my forum which revealed that Brandao is a 767 pilot because it was revealing personal details
Well a quick Google took me directly to Andre Brandao's LinkedIn page, revealing both his Airnav links and his airline links. Not exactly a secret then, and revealed by the man himself.
-
Can we please get back on topic - v3.0 beta testing.
-
Can we please get back on topic - v3.0 beta testing.
Well said tarbat.
AirNav, how about locking this thread and starting a new one - the beta testing stuff is getting lost in here!
-
I only questioned the market share claim, following on from an emotive post made here by AirNav. If RB is outselling the SBS-1 that means something to me and maybe justifies buying a second receiver.
The correct answer would have been along the lines of Tarbat's. Instead I get outed as Anmer (not my MikeC member name here which hid nothing as my email address is visible) and falsely accused of a number of things, including being a conspirator (be careful there Allocator please).
I'll leave you all to it.
-
Can we please get back on topic - v3.0 beta testing.
Those accusations and the stupid remarks had to be redressed.
-
AirNav, how about locking this thread and starting a new one - the beta testing stuff is getting lost in here!
Even better:
1. Lock this thread.
2. Publish a complete list of the v3.0 beta testing issues so far. On Flyspray?
3. Start a new thread for any new v3.0 beta testing issues.
-
Can we please get back on topic - v3.0 beta testing.
Those accusations and the stupid remarks had to be redressed.
No they don't no more that all the stupid remarks on certain other forums :-)
Dooohhh! I must stop rising to this baiting!
-
AirNav, how about locking this thread and starting a new one - the beta testing stuff is getting lost in here!
It would be easier to follow any beta testing thread if such a thread were pruned regularly and the state of the bug list was updated and kept at the top of the thread, or indeed that a sticky post with this information was added to the forum.
I was just about totally lost in the 32 pages of posts before this morning regarding where things were/are.
-
AirNav,
Whatever you might have said in private messages is not seen by the rest of us.
All we see is what you post here and at the risk of sounding confrontational (which I am not) you do come across as extremely paranoid and I wish you could see how your attitude comes across to your users especially your stance towards the competition and your hyper-defensive posture towards certain 'unmentionable' issues.
I realise you are justifiably proud of your RadarBox as I am justifiably proud in owning & using it but to take every opportunity to have a cheap shot at the competition you expose yourself not only to ridicule but you risk becoming a target for those who might have an axe to grind or wish to have a dig back.
I also read the latest sales leaflet on the RadarBox that you link to and despite my advocacy for your product to be honest it made me want to throw up. If it was mentioned that it is self contained and needed no 3rd party add-on software to make it work once it was mentioned at least 10 times.
This is obviously a blatant dig at the competitions expense and in poor taste if you ask me.
Also it mentions the receiver is extremely sensitive about half a dozen times.
I know from experience the receiver is extremely sensitive - my two week old receiver was replaced and its replacement was repaired recently. Bear in mind that it has spent most of its life in the box because I found the software unusable for me on my system and you might see my point.
If you ban users who have shelled out $600+ then is it really a surprise that some of those might want to create forums or blogs to shout about their disatisfaction with the Company involved?
As has been said before it is a fact of life that you cannot please all of the people all of the time but you should be capable of rising above all that without hunkering down & being drawn into a slanging match.
You (we) have a great product and it is fine comparing it to the competition which IMHO it beats hands down but to keep harping on about it and putting into type things such as you have makes you come across as childish & churlish and your Company as petty which I would like to believe is not the case.
You have a great product which will stand on its own merits without constantly sniping at the competition or making outlandish statements like that above.
To do so is to the detriment of your own integrity.
I have been on the receiving end of a personal attack from you in this very forum. I did compose a reply but then decided not to post as it would have serve no real purpose other than to risk you digging a bigger hole for yourself.
For those who might be interested;
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=1304.msg9799#msg9799
My unposted reply has sat here ever since;
http://www.glyn.me/radarbox/reply.htm
I rose above it.
Maybe you should too...
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
Geez...one plus page of replies in the time that it took me to write my last post and none of them about v3.0 Beta...maybe this topic should be locked so we can all move on! :-)
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
Geez...one plus page of replies in the time that it took me to write my last post and none of them about v3.0 Beta...maybe this topic should be locked so we can all move on! :-)
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
listen everyone it Sunday morning, i love Sunday mornings i have had a hard Saturday night at work
GIVE ME A BREAK.
-
Can we please get back on topic - v3.0 beta testing.
Well said tarbat.
AirNav, how about locking this thread and starting a new one - the beta testing stuff is getting lost in here!
Can we please have a new Beta3 thread and any off topic remarks removed?
-
Glyn,
You do have to bear in mind that there actually have been attempts here on the forum to discredit both AirNav and RadarBox - and I'm not talking about genuine complaints that people have. I visit a cross-section of forums such as this and it doesn't take very much to fill in the blanks. I regularly have quotes I make here cut and pasted into other forums - and not in a pleasant way either! Like it or not, there are people out there who only want to cause trouble, so I'm not surprised if AirNav feel targeted.
By being so approachable, AirNav have actually made life more difficult for themselves. If you never get a reply from a company, then the 'arguments' soon dry up. Another forum that I don't frequent so often these days, the company stopped talking to the users about 18 months ago, leaving the product dealer to communicate with users.
Lets not loose sight of what we are trying to do here. It's a hobby, not an uprising!
-
By being so approachable, AirNav have actually made life more difficult for themselves. If you never get a reply from a company, then the 'arguments' soon dry up. Another forum that I don't frequent so often these days, the company stopped talking to the users about 18 months ago, leaving the product dealer to communicate with users.
Lets not loose sight of what we are trying to do here. It's a hobby, not an uprising!
Well said!
-
By being so approachable, AirNav have actually made life more difficult for themselves. If you never get a reply from a company, then the 'arguments' soon dry up. Another forum that I don't frequent so often these days, the company stopped talking to the users about 18 months ago, leaving the product dealer to communicate with users.
Lets not loose sight of what we are trying to do here. It's a hobby, not an uprising!
Well said!
AGREED 110%,
from pat
-
Glyn,
You do have to bear in mind that there actually have been attempts here on the forum to discredit both AirNav and RadarBox - and I'm not talking about genuine complaints that people have. I visit a cross-section of forums such as this and it doesn't take very much to fill in the blanks. I regularly have quotes I make here cut and pasted into other forums - and not in a pleasant way either! Like it or not, there are people out there who only want to cause trouble, so I'm not surprised if AirNav feel targeted.
By being so approachable, AirNav have actually made life more difficult for themselves. If you never get a reply from a company, then the 'arguments' soon dry up. Another forum that I don't frequent so often these days, the company stopped talking to the users about 18 months ago, leaving the product dealer to communicate with users.
Lets not loose sight of what we are trying to do here. It's a hobby, not an uprising!
Yup...I have to agree Gary.
I have many hobbies but none that are capable of generating anywhere near as much 'fan boy' mentality as this one!
You will recall I am sure my first outing almost a year ago now when I asked the same question in both forums and on the other one I was immediately accused and was told that I was being investigated!
That thread was subsequently deleted...
It was that attitude (along with the response and input from AirNav as the manufacturer on this forum) which prompted me to buy into the RadarBox which IMHO is far and away above the SBS-1 for my own particular requirements.
Don't regret it for a minute and always recommend RadarBox to anyone who will isten! :-)
Kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
No real suprise with all this guys?
I think it was Pat (forgive me if I'm wrong Pat) who got complained to when the word "vultures" got mentioned wrt releasing version 3
you only have to look around the web to see the latent intent boiling under - seems we (and AirNav) were correct
Hats off to Tarbat, Allocator and the rest of the regular guys doing an incredible job in moving 3 forward - Personally I'm still using version 2 as I simply don't have enough quality time to dig into v3 to do any of the beta testing justice,however am looking forward to switching to it when the time personally is right for me..
Keep up the fantastic work guys and don't get embroiled with having to fend off these time wasters
Happy spotting..........blue skys,cloud disappearing, get the beers out of the fridge and have a great day!
Rich
-
As per some suggestions we have created this new topic to discuss the continued and deliberate attacks, negative posts and similar messages sent ALWAYS from the same users.
Some of them participate in our competitors forum with a total different attitude. One of them (MikeC) is a well known user of our competitors product, is one of the top 5 posters on their forum, is part of the administration of another internet forum where 99% of RadarBox related messages are only intended at damaging the image of the company - and most of them totally false.
So what you sometimes read here are not ingenuous posts but something with hidden objectives.
BTW: I believe our users should know that AirNav Systems has tried to have a permanent advertising on that forum. Have some discussions we found out that our competitors have an permanent H24 advertisement there and they do not pay for it!
Adding to this we are still waiting for "DaveReid" answer to our post.
-
Adding to some of this messages, the below topic is also interesting:
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=2870.0
-
Adding to some of this messages, the below topic is also interesting:
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=2870.0
Interesting??
Yawn....
-
It is very interesting GlynH. Because the user behind those actions is a frequent member of the forum created by MikeC and other competitor product users and is allowed at that forum to post false messages and topics (adding to an external blog) created with the sole intention of damaging RadarBox reputation.
Who knows who is behind all this...
At least our users now know that you and other "users" here are frequent members of that community.
-
Some of them participate in our competitors forum with a total different attitude. One of them (MikeC) is a well known user of our competitors product, is one of the top 5 posters on their forum, is part of the administration of another internet forum where 99% of RadarBox related messages are only intended at damaging the image of the company - and most of them totally false.
Well I must say that my first 'exposure' to him (if it is who I think it is) on the other forum was not encouraging as we appeared to be at loggerheads but then I was the new guy and he had been around the block a few times.
I will say though that despite our differences he comes across as a knowledgable person with a sense of humour and I find the majority of the posts I have read informative & enjoyable and as such feel that by picking or singling out individuals such as MikeC as you do only lines you up for a retribution in one form or another.
We spend hundreds of pounds on the equipment to indulge ourselves as we all share the same interest in this hobby or else we wouldn't be here - or there!
The last thing we want to listen to is drivel, accusations & exaggerations no matter which manufacturer we choose.
Some of us are more outspoken than others however and I class myself amongst that group if you hadn't already noticed! ;^)
He has every right to post here but if you didn't 'goad the natives' so much by your flippant & antagonising outbursts I am sure we could get along a little better even if it might prove impossible to live in peace & harmony ever after! ;^)
I do after all drop in to read the other forums from time to time (as do others who are more active than I am) and have learned a lot from doing so but I hate the politics of it all.
As I said in another post just rise above it, get on with what you do best and don't rise to the bait.
Just my 2c worth of course...:-)
Regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
Glyn: our only problem is that we have to read, day after day, week after week, month after month, negative comments (some of them false), negative actions, focusing on negative facts ALWAYS coming from the same users. We also find out that some of them (not all as stated below) have closed connections to our competitors. Others even create blogs to post false facts about RadarBox.
We have a forum with more than 2000 users now, who daily have to read the same messages from the same persons and to be inside this when they simply want to learn more about their hobby.
Would you ban these users? Would turn a topic into a nightmare (just like our V3.0 beta was turned when 99% of the users are extremely happy with the new version)? Would you forget about the forum and "let these guys do whatever they want"?
As told before we are not just another company. We are growing. We want a better product. We want a better software. We want new versions each year. we want new features to be implemented and we will not surrender to this kind of people who just like to see and make negative comments while having a totally different opinion on "other" forums regarding "other" products that don't have a new software version for...3 years. Why don't the complain there?
-
BTW: I believe our users should know that AirNav Systems has tried to have a permanent advertising on that forum. Have some discussions we found out that our competitors have an permanent H24 advertisement there and they do not pay for it!
Adding to this we are still waiting for "DaveReid" answer to our post.
You lot are living in dreamland, I am amazed that you put such accusations into print.
-
Adding to this we are still waiting for "DaveReid" answer to our post.
Pardon me, but what on earth are you talking about ?
I'm not aware of anything that you have posted where you needed an answer from me but haven't had one.
And what's with the "DaveReid" in quotes ? I always post under my own name and I'm always happy to be held accountable for anything I say.
Or are you suggesting that there's an impostor who is impersonating me ? :-)
-
Davereid: I'm sorry it was not you. Please accept our apologies.
I'm referring to user "Deadcalm".
Hamish: can you tell all the community how much does it cost to have an advertisement on the site you moderate and how much is the company that advertises there paying you for it?
I believe you remember well that you refused to pass this information to us - it is unbelievable nowadays that any internet "business" refuses to pass the conditions they offer for advertisement which make us all think that the condition are different depending on which company they are going to advertise...
If you don't agree with the above, are you interested in having our banner too with the same conditions you offered to the other company? Our users would be interested to know how impartial you and the other moderators of the forum (Anmer/MikeC) are.
The banner is ready:
-
I understand...I really do and I feel for you guys but you are caught between a rock and a hard place.
As soon as you are in the public eye you put your head above the parapet and become a target for all & sundry to take a pot shot at you. This is a fact and it happens to everyone who is succesful.
Some of those might be valid - some might not - and believe me I know how difficult it is not to respond straight away and hit back.
You are on a hiding to nothing but IMHO sometimes you don't help yourselves with your outbursts and this does nothing to help your cause.
I know your product is better than the competition - as I said previously I recommend it to anyone who will listen and bought myself one last year and am about to buy another one in the next few weeks.
For my peace of mind I want to hear why your product is better to validate my purchase not why the competition may be worse...each product does have its pluses and minuses after all...
You can be just as guilty at posting negative comments about the competition (and its users) so maybe you should take the lead and pull yourself up out of the downward spiral we seem to be in.
You can set an example and rise above all this shit - can I say that here?
There is a wealth of knowledgable users out there on both sides of the fence who indulge and share in this interesting hobby and who don't want to become embroiled in politics.
I have said before one of the reasons I chose AirNav was because of your presence in the forum and because you are engaged in actively developing your software.
But please enough is enough...and on my part I have spoken out too much on this subject and so I am going to put a sock in it...
Now stop falling victim to 'bear-baiting' and go work on v3.0! :-)
Thanks & kind regards,
-=Glyn=-
-
Let's get something straight.
I (MikeC) do not work for Kinetic nor ML&S. I'm just an SBS-1 user and potential ANRB user.
I did not start the "other" forum which does not have 99% of its messages attacking AirNav or its products.
Anyone who goes there will see that it is balanced and covers issues with the other product too. Check my postings on the Kinetic Forum and you'll soon realise that I don't work for them and nor am I a puppet.
And stop posting so called "facts" that you cannot back up with evidence. The alleged banner advert is complete fabrication as we can easily demonstrate.
It's a good job you guys aren't based in the UK.
-
Hamish: can you tell all the community how much does it cost to have an advertisement on the site you moderate and how much is the company that advertises there paying you for it?
I believe you remember well that you refused to pass this information to us - it is unbelievable nowadays that any internet "business" refuses to pass the conditions they offer for advertisement which make us all think that the condition are different depending on which company they are going to advertise...
If you don't agree with the above, are you interested in having our banner too with the same conditions you offered to the other company? Our users would be interested to know how impartial you and the other moderators of the forum (Anmer/MikeC) are.
The banner is ready:
FYI and as you well know, you accepted the terms of having your banner on my site, you then tried to gain some control over the forum, in which you failed, you then started threatining me with legal action after which I decided that I did not want your banner on my site and I also filtered out all Google ads that refer to your company.
You asked me to diclose to you the details of my dealing with ML&S, I dont think that those details are any of you buisness.
Now, after all the accusations you have made againt my site, forum, my staff and myself, you have the affront to ask yet again to have you banner on my site.
My forum has never been anti Airnav, you just see it as so because you have no control.
Kinetic pay a lot for their ad, how much is my buisness, not yours.
I am at a loss to be able to understand you.
Hamish
-
MikeC: thanks for being so direct.
Of course we TOTALLY disagree in the forum being impartial or not. And of course we are 100% sure it is partial.
Regarding the "alleged banner fabrication": why email after email, contact after contact (we do have evidence), the webmasters refuse to send details on what is behind it?
Putting it simple and for everyone to read: do you accept having our banner there, replacing the current banner, H24, running a promotion on RadarBox?
Regarding not being a RadarBox user: I see that you have just wrote that you are thinking in buying one because our competitors will not, one more time, have an upgrade to their software (after 3 years). Maybe in 1 year we would be all happy here discussing the problems with V4.0 and you would be part of our community.
-
>Kinetic pay a lot for their ad, how much is my buisness, not yours.
Where is the evidence? :-)
I will send again: if you want to show everybody that you are impartial, our banner is ready and we can offer one free RadarBox to have a competition there.
-
I will send again: if you want to show everybody that you are impartial
Simple, just read the forum
-
Lets not bring up the subject of competitions.....................
-
The mentioned site is totally impartial. Only you think otherwise.
I sell online advertising to companies every week. Yes there's a rate card but not everyone pays the rate card and I certainly don't disclose agreements with one company to another. That's how a free market economy works.
I sent you thesite standard advertsing agreement twice and you didn't bother to reply. At every stage you kept trying to change the rules of engagement and we have a complete audit trail of all the exchanges.
I think Hamish has made it very plain. He doesn't want your business.
-
Hamish, you are the owner of a website that:
1- 99% of the users creating problems, many of them false, on our forum come from there;
2- They are free to post at a time 5 or more topics with false comments on RadarBox - and free to have 90% of the posts with negative facts about RadarBox;
3- At least one of the moderators comes to our forum to post negative comments;
4- Runs a permanent banner on our competitor product;
5- Refuses to send information on this banner conditions to other possible advertisers;
6- Refuses to run an AirNav Systems banner.
7- One of the moderators/most active users of the site is BY FAR the most active user of our competitors product.
And you say it is impartial?
-
MikeC: I'm sorry but please don't send inappropriate direct links to this forum.
-
You guys are paranoid.
Have a good day.
-
I give up, belive what you like, I have wasted enough of my Sunday on your paranoia.
Over and out.
-
For the records you refuses to answer of our direct questions above which clearly shows that the constant attacks happening on this forum and always made by the same users (which you clearly support) have their reason.
We too believe it is better not to annoy our customers with this one more time.
-
Only had it about a month now. Learning as I go. Neat to see it on the screen. Then go look outside in the daytime.
The 3.0 public beta users. Should had there own forum area to talk about the beta.
To keep it out of the main RadarBox Discussion forum area. So the 2.0 users didn't have to read all the fuss about 3.0 beta.
Welcome to the forum Shadowman - I see that you joined yesterday. How long have you had your RB and have you played with any of the earlier versions of the software?
-
Airnav, you have been good enough to allow others to air their views but can this topic now be locked and we get on with supporting the Radarbox users?
cheers
-
Done.
-
You can follow this topic at:
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=2984.msg27341#msg27341