As far as I'm concerned, I discovered Orbiter through KSP (KurtJMac did a couple of video about Orbiter). I like both a lot, I like the feel of realism of Orbiter, but since I know absolutely nothing about coding, I use KSP to build stuff (and blow up stuff :lol: ).
The thing I dislike with KSP is that (for now but it's coming soon) there's a fair bit of realism missing. I try to play the more realistic way I can (i.e. no aerobraking at 10km/s in deep atmosphere with a ISS-like ship, and that kind of stuff). And I also play full vanilla because I think the majority of the mods are OP. I try to build my rocket saying ''could it be plausible in real life'' (to a certain degree of course). I'm waiting impatiently for reentry heat to be added and hear people complaining about how they cannot reach other planets because they cannot aerobrake (I know it's bad to laugh about other people).
That being said, I personally don't really like Scott... I know he has a really good understanding of orbital mechanics and stuff, but I hate seeing him abuse the game like he does (9 part vessel to minimus... really...).
And on the Orbiter vs KSP debate, I think the developers of KSP said that they were inspired by Orbiter, but their goal is not to compete with it. They are different, Orbiter is more for hardcore fans sim (Fan Simulator X?
) and KSP is for fun and explosion and quick games (it's a lot faster to do stuff in KSP). Oh and for people like me who wants to build stuff but don't know how in orbiter :lol:
Again, this is only my view of the things.