Author Topic: Support for classic systems?  (Read 6228 times)

scsirob

Support for classic systems?
« on: June 20, 2018, 09:57:55 pm »
In the early beta days , PAW required a different RPi and bridge board. I bought those early on. Those became obsolete after new functionality was added and a new bridge board was required. A couple of software versions later, support for the old hardware was gone and we needed to buy new hardware. Which I did. I now have a fixed install in my plane, and it works very well.

Now Rosetta comes in, with RPi 3 and some extra's. 3rd generation in just over two years. More features, more processing power required. This begs the question: How long before my current hardware will be declared obsolete? What commitment for ongoing support for the now-classic hardware can existing users expect?

Admin

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2018, 10:23:00 pm »
Hi Rob
As long as is practically possible I think is the answer
For instance we still support pi1b+, but this does not support some features, such as bearingless targets
Thx
Lee

Ian Melville

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2018, 06:29:19 am »
Rob, the only part which is obsolete and no longer supported is the old radio bridge board and at that time PilotAware was very much for those who like experimenting as you said a beta model. As Lee says the Pi B+ is still supported and any change you make to the pi2B was to gain audio alerts and mode C/S detection, not because of lack of backward support.

You speak of buying new hardware as though a complete kit is required, when in fact, operationally, the only hardware difference between all the PilotAware versions is the Pi version and a 8Gb SD card. A small cost especially if you repurpose your old Pi.

scsirob

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2018, 05:37:07 pm »
Hi guys,
Fair enough. I'm just a bit weary having to replace an otherwise well-working device in my plane, especially now that it's a fixed install. With most old equipment you can keep using it, even if the vendor stops supporting it or vanishes, but as PAW is an annual licensed device, as soon as updates are no longer supported the clock starts ticking for having to plan replacement. Still wouldn't mind a perpetual license option to avoid this.

Anyway. at this time it sounds like I was too nervous. Sorry for that.


exfirepro

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2018, 08:26:51 am »
Hi guys,
Fair enough. I'm just a bit weary having to replace an otherwise well-working device in my plane, especially now that it's a fixed install. With most old equipment you can keep using it, even if the vendor stops supporting it or vanishes, but as PAW is an annual licensed device, as soon as updates are no longer supported the clock starts ticking for having to plan replacement. Still wouldn't mind a perpetual license option to avoid this.

Anyway. at this time it sounds like I was too nervous. Sorry for that.


Rob,

I can understand your concerns. I have often considered what would happen if Lee should ever decide that enough is enough. In the meantime, however, the ‘annual licence renewal’ has two principle benefits as I see it :-

1. In theory at least, it gives the team an extra incentive to keep on developing and improving the system (though in financial terms I doubt it even covers the cost of the coffee) and...

2. More importantly, Human nature being what it is, - It significantly increases the likelihood that users will install updates - at least once a year. (I’m still surprised at the number of users who suddenly decide to update only when their licence renewal comes around).

 .....so in practice everybody wins.

Best Regards

Peter
« Last Edit: June 22, 2018, 08:30:31 am by exfirepro »

neilmurg

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2018, 10:30:25 pm »
Would you consider a permanent license? £60+vat, or 90? I'd sign up for that (the 60!), even if you had to send out an annual license code update, that would work for me. It's a shared risk isn't it? I get a fixed price, you get money up front, and we're both gambling on the longevity of the solution. It's not a requirement to support me forever, just as long as you're developing.
If you were taken over by a more profit minded entity, they would no doubt rename the next version Iron Fist and cease support for Rosetta ;-P

scsirob

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2018, 01:55:16 pm »
I'd sign up for 90 as well. Having a device with a hard stop date is not good. Especially when you only find out by the time the license has expired. Since mounting the PAW in my plane, I haven't used the web interface until this morning when I updated the system to the may release. There's no advance warning, so unless you start putting reminders in agendas it's going to bite you when you are about to leave for a nice trip.

So yes, I am *very* much interested in a fixed, non-expiring license. I would even be OK with a split license into a 'never stops working' for 90 part, and 'updates available until' date. So if I'm happy with what I have, it will just work, and if three years from now I find that there's new functionality then I'd be happy to pay another 15 or so for the latest and greatest update (*if* that still runs on my hardware)

Rob

Giver

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2018, 03:07:44 pm »
likewise i would also be interested in a one off license payment,

Geo!

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2019, 03:04:52 pm »
I do think some in warning close to the expiry date would be good.  I was caught out the last time and thought there was an issue with the system.

Admin

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2019, 05:12:15 pm »
I do think some in warning close to the expiry date would be good.  I was caught out the last time and thought there was an issue with the system.

An email is sent two weeks prior to expiry, to the registered email address
Did you not receive this ?
Thx
Lee

scsirob

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #10 on: September 01, 2019, 10:46:53 am »
The email was sent while I was on vacation. I'm planning to renew at a later time, perhaps after the winter. Does a renewal start at the date of payment, or at the date of expiry of the last license?

I'm still very much in favour of a perpetual license. All equipment in my plane keeps on working, although for some the manufacturer is no longer in business. All except for PAW.

SGS66

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2019, 09:27:19 pm »
Those manufacturers that are no longer in business ? No chance of an update from those people then. It's good to be with PilotAware.

exfirepro

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #12 on: September 02, 2019, 06:20:17 am »
Rob,

As I have said several times before, annual licensing prompts users to update their software at least once a year, which helps ensure that their equipment is up to date and that they are benefitting from the latest developments. (I have just spent a large part of the weekend doing ‘annual updates’ of customers’ old ‘Classics’ on the stand at the LAA Rally). It also acts an incentive (not that this is needed) for the Team to continue development, rather than simply rest on our laurels.

There was some discussion over the weekend on the stand about possibly extending the licence period to 5 years, but (like aviation medicals and pilot’s licences) IMO this would only make forgetting to renew even more likely.

We are all guilty of reading e-mails then forgetting to act on them, but perhaps the answer is to write the renewal date in our (electronic) diary - which reminded me to check mine and having done so I see that one of my test units has expired, (but I don’t get an e-mail reminder for them).

Just my opinion  :-\

Regards

Peter

grahambaker

Re: Support for classic systems?
« Reply #13 on: September 02, 2019, 07:45:41 am »
Quote
I'm still very much in favour of a perpetual license (sic). All equipment in my plane keeps on working, although for some the manufacturer is no longer in business.

Well, there you go then.