Author Topic: Forum Interference / Problems (Read 74414 times)

shadowman · « **Reply #45 on:** June 28, 2009, 07:33:52 AM »

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.

AirNav Development · « **Reply #46 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:29:38 AM »

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.

FRED · « **Reply #47 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:40:24 AM »

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.

tarbat · « **Reply #48 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:48:15 AM »

Quote from: FRED on June 28, 2009, 08:40:24 AM

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.

FRED · « **Reply #49 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:49:29 AM »

Thank you will try these.

Deadcalm · « **Reply #50 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:50:14 AM »

"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

AirNav Development · « **Reply #51 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:51:40 AM »

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.

AirNav Development · « **Reply #52 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:54:04 AM »

"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.

MikeC · « **Reply #53 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:12:22 AM »

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?

Allocator · « **Reply #54 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:12:30 AM »

Quote from: shadowman on June 28, 2009, 07:33:52 AM

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 Development · « **Reply #55 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:25:15 AM »

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.

tarbat · « **Reply #56 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:47:28 AM »

Quote from: MikeC on June 28, 2009, 09:12:22 AM

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.

MikeC · « **Reply #57 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:48:59 AM »

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?

Allocator · « **Reply #58 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:51:01 AM »

Quote from: MikeC on June 28, 2009, 09:48:59 AM

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.

tarbat · « **Reply #59 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:53:27 AM »

Quote from: MikeC on June 28, 2009, 09:48:59 AM

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!!