RELEASED - AirNav RadarBox Real-Time Network - Comments

[radarspotter10]

hi all.
I like the idea of real time on the network, will have a think about it,  not really fussed on what going elsewhere,  my local flights is far enough for me,  and the price well for just network and i have a good range n my flights, maybe no is the answer to costly?.
RadarBox Network Real-Time Access:
Semi-Annual - EUR € 59.95 per 6 months
Monthly - EUR € 14.95 per month
plus your network yearly subscription, i think?
this is just my option,  my mate in England who's coverage from his house is bad, would love it.

from pat in Ireland  

[OKC-Steve]

...one wonders if another company will re-look at their live sharing...

I don't think the other "company" will be around much longer.  The product is overdesigned, and the software is crippled.

[vaio]

vaio,

1.) This is a beta release not a full release.
2.) The network subscription is not expensive when you realise the servers required to keep this running and the very large network demands.

The choice is yours, we haven't switched delayed off and forced everyone to pay for the Live one.

Understand, but you are you saying that you invest in separate servers for the real time data? It is a little disingenuous what you say, I did not make ANY comment regarding FORCING anyone. I feel that you really are just trying to put the squeeze on your customers, you could simply allow real time data on your current servers and then find that your subscriptions would increase. But, hey, that is my opinion.

[AirNav Support]

As they say: move two steps forward, and then back one.

Crippled software is still crippled software.

Too much of a risk as I am sure you already know, doing that we could end up risking the network not being used or further networks being setup making ours redundant. Further if the live data was passed around, customers in areas covered by RBs would not need to buy RadarBoxes hence sales would nose dive.

This has been all discussed before. So just a recap on why.

[Roadrunner]

Have loaded Beta 3.6. but since changing I am not getting the network. It should not be so as I have only in the last month paid for the coming years subscriptions.
Any ideas please - and before you ask - yes my internet connection is functioning properly?????????

[AirNav Support]

Your software firewall probally needs to allow the new version to connect.

[Roadrunner]

I have checked my ESET firewall and it is showing Allow next to all versions of ANRFB listed.

[Fenris]

Well I'm looking at a page (www.airnavsystems.com/RadarBox/order.html) that's telling me I get free access to the network for a year, then I can pay my 14.95 Euros per month for continuing access to real-time data.

So where do I sign up to get "flagged" as a real-time network account for the remainder of my free period ?

And, no disrespect intended, but shouldn't AirNav be answering basic questions like this themselves ?

Also, if you're within the first year, surely the real-time premium should be the difference between delayed and real-time?

[Fenris]

For those who are saying we want to see it and compare to the delayed network: The only difference between the two is that one is Live (subject to internet delay of uploading and then downloading) and its being updated every 20 seconds.

So there is no way of having a short period where a comparison can be made?

I think it would be very beneficial to offer this. I'd also suggest that you allow those within their first year to upgrade to real-time for a lower cost, say the difference between the two subscription costs.

[AirNav Support]

Do be honest we are not sure why this comparison needs to be made. It seems to us customers just want a trial just to see it not to compare anything as main change is its just Live.

[MrT]

Sorry,

Being new and a bit 'green'; Does this Real-Time mean the 5min delay will be removed ?

I thought this was an imposed 'security' issue ?

Cheers,
Paul.

[Fenris]

As they say: move two steps forward, and then back one.

Crippled software is still crippled software.

Too much of a risk as I am sure you already know, doing that we could end up risking the network not being used or further networks being setup making ours redundant. Further if the live data was passed around, customers in areas covered by RBs would not need to buy RadarBoxes hence sales would nose dive.

This has been all discussed before. So just a recap on why.

I do see your point, so perhaps it's worth considering how to spread the data via p2p rather than relying on servers with expensive bandwidth and running costs.

Sooner or later someone will design hardware with an open basis, and then software to exploit it. Having a plan to maintain your business in the face of such competition would be sensible.

Purely my $0.02 you know.

[Fenris]

Do be honest we are not sure why this comparison needs to be made. It seems to us customers just want a trial just to see it not to compare anything as main change is its just Live.

Yes I see that, but since my experience of the network has been that v2.01 did not correctly transition flights from local to network coverage, and up until today's release v3.01 beta had an over-aggressive timeout leading to network flights disappearing and then reappearing, I was hoping to be able to see how things worked for me at the boundary between what I can see on my own RB and what others see.

But I do understand that all of these features cause you extra work, it might just be worth it to attract more subscribers.

[DaveReid]

My guess is that you pay your £14.31 per month, and get the real-time network.  No mention of a "discounted" price during the first year.

Well that's not how I would interpret this:



It states pretty clearly Network Personal Access is free for the first year without making any distinction between delayed and real-time access, apart from the cost obviously.

But I take your point - we're both trying to second-guess the answer to a question that AirNav could easily clarify if they wanted to.

Is anyone there ?

[vaio]

Do be honest we are not sure why this comparison needs to be made. It seems to us customers just want a trial just to see it not to compare anything as main change is its just Live.

Why don't you be really honest and say 'we have found a way to charge our customers extra'

oh, that would be bad eh? like you attempting to make us believe that your server costs have more than doubled?

(I guess your professional users do not squeak so much when asked to fork over large quantities of wonga)

Maybe you could be really honest with some user figures and server costs to help us (customers) make a decision about how much you really care about your 'customers'? (remember our initial investment in your chinese £400 box)

I get the feeling that honest is a word that you really attempt to stretch the meaning of. I am sorry if you do not like what I write, but it is my opinion.