Saitek controllers should not be integrated

[digital nomad]

I was really looking forward to a finished FIP and panel driver. However I don't like the integration of the Saitek Flight Controllers driver. Not everybody uses these. I use CH Products controllers which don't even require a driver. They are plug and play.

I think the Saitek Flight controllers should be a separate driver or maybe a plugin to the SPAD.Next

[ab-tools]

Hello,

if you don't user them, what's the problem for you if they are being integrated?
If you don't have them connected to your system, they will just not appear in SPAD.NeXt. There shouldn't be any problem arising from that for you.

Best regards
Andreas

[digital nomad]

Most flight simmers have FSUIPC4 installed and it already has a very powerful flight controller/profiles setup. I use it myself and it works flawlessly. I can't think of one reason why somebody with a Saitek controller would even want the integration.

I still stand by my original post. SPAD.neXt should be a mean, lean driver for the Saitek panels, BIP and FIP's and forget about the additional bloat.

[c0nnex]

If you don't want it, you can just disable those in the Settings. Don't get your point.

[ab-tools]

Exactly what I wrote above already as well.

If you don't need it, just disable it.

[thedazman]

The Saitek yoke has some non HID functionality like the mode switch, while I have this working beautifully in FSUIPC also I like the fact I can press a button and run macros, while this is possible in FSUIPC it's complex to setup the .ini file for macros in FSUIPC.

It's may not be everyone's cup of tea it will have it's uses and keep most of us configuring hardware in one place. You also have to remember no everyone has FSUIPC.

I have CH pedals and will NEVER change them and this means I'm also going to have to configure my devices in two different places, but it's all about having the choice.

Daz

[digital nomad]

Of course anybody with a Saitek controller will naturally probably not support my opinion. But for those of us who use OTHER controllers it would be nice if the installer offered the option to NOT install Saitek controller support all together rather then have to disable it in the settings.

After all...

"SPAD" is Saitek PANEL Advanced Driver.

[thedazman]

It's also NEXT generation and as such an Improvement.

If it's not attached it won't be seen, seriously don't get your argument. I also have other controllers and not hard done by configuring them else where but if I can use SPAD features on one device I just happen to have then that would be my preferance. The yoke and fip are adverts for future enhancements currently, when working you won't see them if they aren't attached just like you won't see a radio panel if you don't have one, or a BIP if you don't have one, or a switch panel if you don't have one etc etc etc.

Its like saying I only fly Cessna so why did Microsoft add a 747, it's all about giving choice and breaking boundaries, what's the point of reinventing if it's to be limited by numonics of an old name.

We could rename it SAD for you ! But the NEXT is for those wanting next generation..

[c0nnex]

it would be nice if the installer offered the option to NOT install Saitek controller support all together rather then have to disable it in the settings.

No need for it...
As always in SPAD.neXt you will only see the supported devices that you have connected, and by default they will do nothing, until you configure it to do something....

If you have no Yoke you will not see it .. do you see it now?
If you have it but don't want SPAD.neXt to use it/tamper with it, you leave it unconfigured.
If you have it but don't want SPAD.neXt to use it and want to spare the CPU that is needed to read the device, disable it in config

As easy as that.