Random Thought

On Mar 29, 1:08*pm, Steve Leonard wrote:
I suspect many have gotten a notice from OLC saying "Your partnership
is about to end." *Wonder if they might be more willing to work to
accept standard .cai files from Cambridge Model 10/20/25 loggers if
they heard from enough of us with a standard reply such as:

"My support for OLC has ended because your support of my logger has
ended. *My support of you will resume when your support of me
resumes."

Yes, I know. *We have all been through the discussions about files,
standard formats, acceptable means of blah blah blah. *Money talks.
If OLC looses too much support (and I know they are losing some), but
has it dangled back in front of them, maybe there would be motivation
for what on the surface appears to be a relatively easy thing to check
for and accept. *I know they have very sharp people working for them.
I can't imagine it would take them too long to figure out how to
accept and validate a standard .cai file for their scoring purposes.

Your random thoughts?

Steve
ZS


What I don't understand is ....if it used to work, why can't it
continue to work....I don't get it!
Dan

On Mar 29, 10:28*pm, Sean Fidler wrote:
Because Cambridge refuses to provide a file update that OLC needs to maintain the integration. *They have been asking for years, and Cambridge has failed to deliver. *OLC is volunteer and charges no fee. *Cambridge is the problem, not OLC.

May I suggest buying a new logger? *Nano? *500 bucks? *Works great. *Perhaps a non Cambridge? *Cambridge is no longer supporting this model apparently...

This question was answered by OLC at the Reno convention.

Sean
F2

Sean, I understand that OLC is volunteer. See all the ads on the
page? Think OLC is putting those up because they like the products?
Think OLC asking for donations from users does not provide some
income? "Volunteer run" does not mean "no money changes hands". I
haven't looked too closely, but I don't think that all .igc files from
all loggers are identical except for manufacturer code. So, if they
have to be able to identify the different files from different
loggers.

Rather than telling me and hundreds of other people to each spend
$500, why not ask the OLC folks (like we have been doing ) to spend
$500 or even $1000 of money they take in through selling ads and by
donations from users to program their validation system support plain
old Cambridge .cai files? Oh, that is right. They said they don't
want to. Forget the fact that they are probably going to lose more
from donations by not doing it than it would cost to do it. I guess
that is their decision and they can stick with it.

And for what it is worth, I bought a FlywithCE so I can at least get a
Blue V. Now, we will see how well the cockpit does with 4 GPS in it
(Cambridge Model 20, PowerFLARM, SPOT, and FlywighCE). But, you
probably won't see a smiley by my flights for much longer.

Hey OLC, if you are listening, I will up my yearly donation if you
will make your system accept .cai files for Green V.

Steve Leonard
ZS

Ah Steve. Why dont you just pay to have the code updated yourself? Its pocket change right? The Evil OLC is pocketing big piles of cash! Its only a few bucks of work right? So another option might be for you to offer payment to OLC and Cambridge to maintain the code. We could do a cost benifit analysis? Seems like alot of work to avoid buying a new logger. :-) Maybe you could form an organization and get members to chip in? Any of these ideas sound interesting?

One thing is for sure. OLC is not going to continue supporting Cambridge's product(s) for them. Not going to happen. OLC is tired of doing the work at their significant expense and irritation. This has been going on for several years. They are done.

Have you talked to Cambridge about the problem at all? Have they responded to you? If so please share... We cant help you and OLC is done.

Beyond that I dont know what to tell you, Stevo. You might have to, heaven forbin, buy something up to date if you want to participate in OLC. It is unfortunate that this happened for sure but it HAS HAPPENED! Its not going to change unless Cambridge responds. Clearly they do not plan too. Your decision whether to buy something that works with OLC or not is entirely yours.

The $500 units are really nice and have alot of great features.

Good luck.

Sean

Sean Fidler wrote:
OLC is volunteer and charges no fee.

OLC is run by a commercial company that makes a lot of money with the
massive amount of ads. And the German soaring association (Deutscher
Aero Club) pays a ****load of money each year to the OLC for running
the DMSt contest. That makes me kind of angry, because my club fees
pay the OLC company.

Segelflugszene gGmbH (the company) is who owns and runs the OLC.
Segelflugszene e.V. (the charitable society) which you donate money
for does not actually run or decide anything.

Much of the code has been written by commercial contractors, for
example InstantSolutions
(http://www.instantsolutions.de/referenzen_eng.html).

Yes, they have a few volunteers who work for free, believing they're
doing something for the soaring community, but in reality they're just
donating their free time to the company for no payment.

Each pilot who uploads his flights donates his data to the company,
adding to the company's value. The company doesn't give back.
Scientific projects have been denied access to the OLC database. The
database and its user base is the company's asset.

Max

On Monday, April 2, 2012 4:45:13 PM UTC-7, Max Kellermann wrote:
Sean Fidler wrote:
OLC is volunteer and charges no fee.

OLC is run by a commercial company that makes a lot of money with the
massive amount of ads. And the German soaring association (Deutscher
Aero Club) pays a ****load of money each year to the OLC for running
the DMSt contest. That makes me kind of angry, because my club fees
pay the OLC company.

Segelflugszene gGmbH (the company) is who owns and runs the OLC.
Segelflugszene e.V. (the charitable society) which you donate money
for does not actually run or decide anything.

Much of the code has been written by commercial contractors, for
example InstantSolutions
(http://www.instantsolutions.de/referenzen_eng.html).

Yes, they have a few volunteers who work for free, believing they're
doing something for the soaring community, but in reality they're just
donating their free time to the company for no payment.

Each pilot who uploads his flights donates his data to the company,
adding to the company's value. The company doesn't give back.
Scientific projects have been denied access to the OLC database. The
database and its user base is the company's asset.

Max

Not sure I understood who receive the donation money if not the people who develop, run and support OLC? Although I also complained about OLC myself here and there, I still think it is one of the best soaring products available for free, and revolutionized to way we share, measure and compare our flights. I would hope no one will boycott OLC. If you don't agree with them, simply don't donate or click on their ads...

Ramy

Ramy wrote:
Not sure I understood who receive the donation money if not the
people who develop, run and support OLC?

There is no reason to donate money to the OLC, because it is a
commercial organization that lives very well on the money it bills its
customers. You don't donate money to Facebook and Google, do you?

(For the financial report, visit https://www.bundesanzeiger.de/ and
search for "Segelflugszene")

The Segelflugszene e.V. is a charitable club, and the money you pay to
this club is a membership fee, not a donation to the OLC. The real
purpose of this club is unclear.

The "volunteers" who work without payment for the OLC company will not
receive any of your donations.

Although I also complained about OLC myself here and there, I still
think it is one of the best soaring products available for free,

It is just as "free" as Facebook and Google: you don't pay because you
are not the customer, you are the product.


I would like to have a truly "free" web site ("free as in speech", not
just "free as in beer") that is a big database of .IGC files. Anybody
may anonymously download any bulk amount of files and do whatever he
likes with it, for example run his own analysis or do scientific
research (where are the thermals, waves, ...). No stupid registration
enforcement for using the Google maps view! And no censorship in
pilot comments.

Just imagine what you could do with the OLC database if you had bulk
access to it. The OLC was a great achievement at its time, but
corrupted by its power, it is unable to bring the soaring information
age to the next level, because it is not interested in giving up some
control.

Max