Mentioning Flight Trackers other than FlightAware


#1

I’ve got to mention this, but replies and comments are NOT requested.

I really feel that its completely *rude *to direct FA users to any other flight tracking site from these forums. They are all competitors (in varying degrees) with FlightAware. You just don’t send folks to a competitor from any company’s own turf.

The FA staff tactfully avoids commenting on this. They have the ability to delete the messages as soon as they are posted, but choose not to. Its the best thing to do and I applaud them for it.

FA provides this site for FREE, including these Discussion forums. As far as I know, they are the ONLY company who provides this free. I’m sure all of the other companies have pros and cons with their sites and many of them have one feature or another that is not yet found on FA. But I really think that we all owe FA the courtesy of not directing anyone to another tracking site from these forums.

Its exactly the same as someone sitting on a Ford dealership’s car lot telling customers over the dealer’s PA system to go check out the Chevys across the street, or going to McDonalds telling customers that Burger King has something different.

Some of you might feel that competition is fair and may the best tracker win. It might even be a little different if we were paying for use of this forum. However, I’ll repeat that FA gives us this site for FREE. We owe them the courtesy of not directing folks to other trackers.


#2

BTaylor,

While you have not requested replies and comments, I am sure that you will get plenty. After all, why post a comment in a public forum?

I’d have to respectfully disagree with your opinion above.

Sharing is power, and when one posts a link to another flight tracking site, I generally like to take a peek into it. There is nothing rude about it, as they are sharing their experiences and giving me an oppurtunity to make an informed choice. What is wrong with that?

If the other website charge for the same services that Flight Aware provides, well, it’s kinda a no brainer that a person will come back here. Other then the short exposure that a link may provide, that site got nothing out of me (or others that may look).

If I happened to come across a site that interests me more, there is nothing wroing with somebody referring me to that site, and then maybe me seeing something at another site, bring a suggestion back here so the Flight Aware staff can consider a change based on positive experience at another site. It’s a win win situation. Flight aware is still a free service, and I get an oppurtunity to give input AND backing up my opinion with a link that will show why I think that Flight Aware may benefit.

Competition is healthy when used appropriately. It helps improve oneselfs image and services especially when somebody brings out the faults that can be corrected as a result of somebody bringing to the Flight Aware staffs attention and giving them an example to back up their statement.

Comparing a free website to a paid service, there is nothing wrong with it, as long as people don’t spam this site with constant posts bragging yada yada paid flight tracker service is bigger and better.

Having said all the above, while my intimate experiences with other flight tracking services are virtually nil other then looking at random flights that were free and the like, I found Flight Aware by far the best for my 7 year old on borrowed time 500 mhz processor.

Flight aware out performs all other flight tracking websites in so far as systems response time AND processor utilization in my limited experiences on their websites.

I hope that others do share their experiences on other flight tracking websites, and then also come back and say that we are fortunate to have an input on the best flight tracking website AND the service is free to the user.

Allen


#3

Then WTH bring it up?

Short and succinct, IMHO you’re WAY off base.

Either this is an OPEN (non censored) or closed (censored) Forum, can’t be both. I haven’t seen anything from any of the staff suggesting that there are aviation related subjects that are taboo.

Sharing is one of the reasons for being here.

Regards,

James


#4

Dood! You need to relax and take a pill, man!

Your delusional thoughts about competition, car dealerships and burger joints is blown way out of proportion! It’s more like mentioning to someone standing in line at a McDonald’s at the mall that the candy vendor outside is selling some really good candy and that they should try some. Do you think that person would forget about their Big Mac Value Meal, jump out of the McDonald’s line and go buy the candy instead of eating lunch - and then never eat at a McDonald’s again? :unamused:

…or maybe sitting in the car dealership and mentioning to people about the go-cart track down the street. Do you think the people would abandon their search for an automobile at the dealership, and spend the rest of their lives at the go-cart track?

However you want to look at it, FA and the other site in question really are two different things! As far as I can tell, the other site in question can’t do anything that FA does other than show a bunch of airplanes around a specific airport. FA is nationwide - the other site only works for 4 airports. There ain’t nobody gonna jump the FA ship in favor of the other site! :wink:


#5

Perhaps this in reference to the other thread about Passur??

Well, it’s hardly a competitor, it’s in a very different league.

Most people here are probably enthusiasts, and FA caters very well to them…other tracking sites have other markets. Sure, many of them do very similar things … and FA does many things similar to them…that’s the beauty of competition.

You’re not going to be sheltered from other tracking sites just because they are not mentioned here.

FA got into the game late, and made improvments on other older tracking sites …it’s also free.

If FA is better than the other guys, then what’s the harm in mentioning them?

If FA isn’t better, then maybe they should know!

Do you really think people in Boeing forums never mention Airbus :unamused:

Jimbo


#6

Let’s not get like a.net and ban people for mentioning the competition.


#7

Well of course when you post that you will get replies!

So what??? FA is the best. If people didn’t like FA, they wouldn’t be here!


#8

Hi, everyone, and thanks for your support. I really appreciate the consideration and sensitivity towards us. It is true that almost everyone here read these forums, so any criticism or comments are almost certainly read by the person responsible for the decision or aspect of the service.

Admittedly, it would be a little weird if there was constant comparison to competitors or competitors were constantly trying to recruit people to their service. However, Mark (mduell on the forums) pointed out in a meeting recently that it’s the level of curiosity and inquisitiveness that attracts many people to FlightAware in the first place, so it’s par for course that people will be interested in discussing similar technology. Also, I think a few people were led astray with the analogies; the car dealership or boeing/airbus comparison isn’t completely valid since they’re not providing a platform for public exchange of information. Either way, we’ve agreed that it’s not an issue we have a problem with.

On a related note, I strongly disagree that ADS-B is going to make Passur obsolete. FlightAware has proven that a bunch of companies having the same data doesn’t mean they can all offer the same level of information and usability. The availability of ADS-B won’t mean that software and supporting technology for the data will be at the level necessary to displace Passur’s technology.

As was mentioned, FlightAware came several years later than all the other flight tracking companies and with the same live data, we’ve managed to create a product used by over half a million people that ranges from enthusiasts to pilots to part 121 airlines to airport/atc operators and everyone between.

The good news to our users and other aviation data consumers is that we will continue to create and innovate – both in terms of our flight tracking & aviation data services commercial services as well as our successful and compelling business model. We’ve been hedging our bets on new technologies (both in interface/visualization as well as data acquisition) that will continue to change how people think about flight tracking and keep FlightAware’s wide margin ahead of competitors.

Daniel


#9

I agree with everything except perhaps this comment :slight_smile:

I don’t think it makes Passur obsolete (even if I said so - did I?), but if all aircraft had ADS-B transponders - which is the idea right? - then ADS-B does everything that Passur does except for the extremely expensive hardware/software required. If all aircraft transmitted their position every second (read ADS-B), then no need to triangulate, no need for more than one receiver, and you have 4-5 times the update resolution (Passur says 4-5 seconds I think).

Unless I’m wrong, Passur is receiving just the same transponder data (not much) but without the position data of ADS-B - therefore it has to calculate the position via triangulation.

Hey, I agree with everything you said about FA :slight_smile:

Jimbo


#10

That’s where you don’t understand – as FlightAware has proven, the data is only as valuable as the software that makes it useful. The raw information is only half of the equation, so that’s where both FlightAware and Passur have value-adds that are completely independent of the data acquisition source.


#11

I understand OK. The difference is that 90% of the Passur system (in terms of cost) is the hardware to receive exactly the same data as ADS-B gives. The introduction of ADS-B means that hardware is no longer required. The raw data in the Passur case is 90% of the equation.

I agree that Passur as a company will continue strongly, but don’t forget that Passur stands for Passive Surveillance Radar (or something like that).

ADS-B is being implemented for the very reason of not requiring very expensive radar or multilateration systems …

Hey, probably no need to discuss this anyway … we’ll agree to disagree :slight_smile:

Jimbo


#12

I know alot of business that refer a customer to a compeditor. If ACE hardware dosen’t have an item they may direct the customer to True Value Hardware. It is a matter of CUSTOMER SERVICE. Help the customer first.