AccuRC update.

[Boggy]

From AccuRC



AccuRC Precision Simulation


17 hrs ·




Our first update to AccuRC is currently in test with our beta team. We are just waiting for verification from the beta team that the update is OK and then it will be made available to our customers. Announcements and instructions on how to get the update will be posted here and on our website as soon as it is available. We anticipate only a day or two for it to be verified assuming there are no major issues.

[jimmyhorns]

Well fingers crossed then.

[Mslater]

Adie said hopefully for the weekend - lets hope so, can't wait. Having lots of fun with the configurations.

Hey - has anyone crashed into the windsock yet ?

I hit it so hard it span round 3 times: Great fun

[3dx]

Will be picking up mine tomorrow as I think I've gone as far as I can with Phoenix,, judging by what i've read so far it sounds like its still a work in progress and was pushed a bit early, yet others have praised it - will see tomorrow

[SaneAdam]

I find it interesting that Phoenix were berated on this forum by lots of folks for releasing V5 "before it was flyable". They released daily updates to quickly fix any bugs (none of which impacted on me i have to say… it flew fine from very early on. Even if you analyse the content of a lot of the updates, not a lot of it was heli related anyway ) So i don't even really acknowledge that it was ever actually un flyable. Granted there were issues with the amount of traffic they had trying to download the updates so took it offline for a while.

But other than taking the update offline…. which i admit must have been frustrating for many, all they did was act as fast as possible to resolve any minor issues. Even down to the pis* taking over how many letters of the alphabet they would have to use to cope with all the updates… at least they acted fast and sought to resolve the problems that existed. Maybe there is limit current model choice… but who really cares about that?! Not justification for anything when it comes to sims in my opinion (obviously all of this is just my opinion)

Why has the same not happened over Accurc? From what i have read, it has many issues and there have not been a great deal of updates to speak of yet. Why is no one taking the pis* like the Phoenix situation? Is it just because they are the local boy? Maybe because it is a brand new company and people want to give them chance? Is it because they are more open about the rate of development on social media sites? Are people really that kind?!? I guess they must be….

Don't get me wrong… i am not judging the Accurc team in the slightest…. only other than against the competition in terms of the publics response to its release. I have not used the software and am very much looking forward to giving it a try. I also respect the fact that any development takes time and to be patient to give the team time to get the best out of their creation. I was in a band for 12 years…. had global success….but had to endure endless demands for more albums, more music. The fans never understood that it took time to create something of real quality. Something that was going to have an impact and have longevity. I was never into turning out as many albums as possible without any real content.

So the Accurc team deserve our respect of course. As do any team that work to make something better. I guess i just found it interesting that the same school yard pi@@ taking has not started in what i would consider relatively similar circumstances to the Phoenix V5 release.

(I realise this is an Accurc thread and not a Phoenix thread… I apologise for that. I am also not trying to start anything bun wise. Just musing on observations)

[waveydavey]

I'm not your 3D sky god but the first release of V5 was unflyable. I could tip the heli on it's tail and do circuits on the floor. They quickly sorted issues and before long it was back to how it was, I can't see any real improvements in V5 and it wasn't worth updating until it was okay. The odd thing with Phoenix this time round was that they released V5 not a beta as they normally do but a full blown ready to go version. Thats where they went wrong and were rightly berated for this, if they'd advertised the fact that it was beta and we were all testers and reporting issues was part of the procedure then nothing would have been said, but they didn't and got slated.

[SaneAdam]

I'm not your 3D sky god but the first release of V5 was unflyable. I could tip the heli on it's tail and do circuits on the floor. They quickly sorted issues and before long it was back to how it was, I can't see any real improvements in V5 and it wasn't worth updating until it was okay. The odd thing with Phoenix this time round was that they released V5 not a beta as they normally do but a full blown ready to go version. Thats where they went wrong and were rightly berated for this, if they'd advertised the fact that it was beta and we were all testers and reporting issues was part of the procedure then nothing would have been said, but they didn't and got slated.

But a lot are saying this is effectively still a beta yet has had an official release? So they are still guilty of the same crime?!! So surely response should be the same. Maybe i did not fly the very first update for v5…. i must have started with v5 on the first fix. Because i honestly never had an issue…. which i am capable of detecting…. even if just in relation to how the model behaved on the previous version. Anyway…. there are enough people that say it was f$cked for me to believe that it was…. But i still think all they were guilty of was making a mistake…. which subjectively you could argue Accurc have made too. There is enough anecdotal evidence that would suggest people feel it is a beta stage product at this stage anyway. Not all admittedly, but some. A lot of my mates say…. "its got a lot of bugs but you can see it has a lot of potential" Do we really have to use our imagination and visualise a new product being better than it actually is at release? Surely thats beta lol

You could argue that Phoenix did not release a Beta (to the best of their knowledge anyway) they released a faulty product…. but they did rush to fix it. It would seem the paid the price for looking red faced with something that was not usable…. even if just for a brief time. I just don't believe it deserved the mauling it got at the time.

Unless you believe they aimed to deliberately mislead in an attempt to grab early sales in some way. While all along planning to improve things along the way. (a bit like the Accurc hype machine maybe??!) Still though the only offending article is the use…. or non use of the term beta. As obviously… they did fix it… . So the theory they wanted to grab sales and run for the hills leaving a faulty product behind can't be true either??!

[waveydavey]

At the end of the day the updates on Phoenix are free for those that have bought the product so we shouldn't feel in anyway agrieved at an update that doesn't reach it's full potential for a few weeks. As I said above the slating was down to the fact that it was a full release IE no beta and no announcement thus. Not sure about AccuRC, it's got to be difficult to test something so rigorously that there are no issues from the first release, I haven't got it, not got the PC to run it yet but I will have and looking forward to giving it a go.

[Mark_T]

But a lot are saying this is effectively still a beta yet has had an official release? So they are still guilty of the same crime?!! So surely response should be the same.

Big difference is that we all already owned Phoenix so a lot of people tried it and were disappointed and for quite a few who had been slowly updating from V1, it was not trivial to go back to the earlier version ...

Phoenix had the pressure of RealFlight releasing V6.5 and then V7 while they were still working on V5, so they probably did push it live a bit before they should have .

AccuRC on the other hand had to be purchased and judging from those on here at least, not that many rushed in, while others were prepared to watch and wait, so there hasn't been the same volume of people experiencing the problems first hand and although many have been critical they are mostly prepared to give the team a little time to get things sorted.

Now, if they don't get things sorted in fairly short order then you'll see more dissatisfaction pretty quickly and some pretty poor sales numbers as a result.

So there is a strong incentive to fix stuff promptly, though I'd still say they have a better approach in taking a little longer to issue updates, but make the updates solid and meaningful, rather than blasting through the alphabet with small daily incremental fixes.

But, they do have to now get it right.

Can't be taking a couple of weeks to fix things and then not actually fix them.

So, let's see what those who have put their money on the line say about the first patch when it gets here ...

[Nick B]

Believe update is ready to download.

[ragge1]

just to be sure , just updated and mine shows
- accurc is v1,0 and the adapter (dongle) is v1,4,3,0

is this correct

[Boggy]

Support | AccuRC make sure AccuRC is NOT running when you run the updates.

if the dongle update takes more than two minutes stop it close the updater and retry.

[AlastairC]

This update has made a huge difference for me. No more control lag! Also the models Goblin and Trex 700 appear to fly as they should. The HUD is giving some data now while flying.

I am running it under Parallels on my iMac and getting 65 fps and 800+ fps on the physics at 2560x1440 screen res.. so well happy

Now it is just above Realflight now in my view and it is still a V1. So well done guys. Now hoping that my voting will get one of my models in the sim.

Cheers,
Alastair

[ragge1]

has anybody got there showing v1,1

[AlastairC]

has anybody got there showing v1,1

My about box shows Version 1.1 and adaptor version 1,4,3,0

Cheers,
Alastair