IRS system 747/What about 737?

[MSW 0]

I notice that the IRS system may be modeled in the upcoming 747. I definitely plan to purchase it. Since the IRS system may be modeled in the 747, any chance that it can be transfered over to the 737?Mike

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Mike-Not easily.In order to add much of the technology developed for the 744 into the 737 series, we'd have to start almost from scratch.I've written length explanations on this a few times- but to paraphrase myself:The 737 development was started in August of 2002, at a time when PMDG had almost no development experience within MSFS. (We were developing entirely for FLY! prior to that point in time.) As such, there were design decisions that we made during the NG development cycle that have locked us into certain parameters as far as growth is concerned.The lessons were learned, however- and the 747 is quite a bit more robust, inclusive and complete. The NG would need a nearly entire rewrite to use much of what we've learned however- so I don't see that happening right away.

[Guest tmetzinger]

>Mike->>Not easily.>>In order to add much of the technology developed for the 744>into the 737 series, we'd have to start almost from scratch.>>I've written length explanations on this a few times- but to>paraphrase myself:>>The 737 development was started in August of 2002, at a time>when PMDG had almost no development experience within MSFS. >(We were developing entirely for FLY! prior to that point in>time.) As such, there were design decisions that we made>during the NG development cycle that have locked us into>certain parameters as far as growth is concerned.>>The lessons were learned, however- and the 747 is quite a bit>more robust, inclusive and complete. >>The NG would need a nearly entire rewrite to use much of what>we've learned however- so I don't see that happening right>away.>>I understand your position, but I will state for the record that I'd buy (at full price) a completely rewritten 737 that takes advantage of all you've learned on the 747 and fixes the few niggling issues on the 737 9like IRS and step climb and maybe ACARS?).I'm quite certain I've gotten my money's worth out of the original 737 and wouldn't feel cheated to buy a new one if it was as nice as the 747.

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

TimI think any author/artist/software developer will understand what I mean with the following comment:"I keep looking at the NG code and thinking: i can do that SOOOOOO much better now."Any work of art is never finished...I think i have a responsibility to finish the 744 first tho... then we can all talk about what comes next!

[Guest]

Maybe you would, but how many others? How many people don't buy the NG because it's a 737 and they have the DF 734 and still use that?Sure it's a -400 instead of an NG but that in fact makes it more fun because it's more involved (far more buttons to push).I wouldn't buy another 737NG just because it had a working IRS, whoever made it. It would really have to offer a substantial improvement in functionality (maybe both FMCs working independently, secondary flightplans, etc. etc. might make it worth a price but not necessarilly the full purchase price again). But as stated the cost (in time and resources) would be huge and I don't think such a project would at this time be economically viable.Maybe in a few years when the current product can no longer compete on equal footing with others on the market...

[michal 44]

>I wouldn't buy another 737NG just because it had a working>IRS, whoever made it. I am here in agreement with Tim - it is not just the IRS but everything else that clearly puts 747's technology apart - much better VC graphics, smooth VC displays, complete systems, etc. But I agree that the number of folks who would pay the full price for another 737NG may be limited - just yesterday someone suggested "it better be a cheap upgrade". Unless you have full appreciation for what this new state-of-the-art is you won't pay for it. There is hope of course that when people get 747-400 in their hands some minds will change.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

[Guest mangold]

Guten Tag Robert.Concerning 737NG may I ask, how many % work went into designing of VC versus 2D - roughly.G

[Guest]

I wonder how many people will jump in and demand an upgrade fee from their FS2000 PSS 744 to the PMDG 744 ;)

[Guest Boone]

I've been thinking about this as well recently, particularily as FS2006 may be not so far away. In the future I would also like the 737NG to be upgraded as new technologies arise. It is the most versatile aircraft on the market. I can fly her in any location, short hall / long hall, she fits all my simming needs. I don't think I'd upgrade to another FS until the 737NG was available for it to be honest. Even though I will be purchasing the 747 as soon as she's released, I doubt I'll fly her as much as her little sister.FSD recently offered an update for their Cheyenne 400LS which I own. It is in fact the only GA plane I fly regularily. I only hope that PMDG will do this for their products - at cost or as a free upgrade, it doesn't matter - as long as the best 737NG available remains available and continues to push the envelope. Best RegardsBoone,BooneEIDW@hotmail.com"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle. It's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."

[dave_paige 11]

I agree with Tim completely. I would buy an upgraded PMDG 737NG, even at the full price I paid for the 6/7/8/900. It's just that good and I feel I've definetly gotten my moneys worth. I enjoy flying the current one so much it's almost all I fly except for antiques. I intend no pressure as to when in the post, just that I'd be a customer.

[Guest jacaru]

This is a difficult issue in FS addon development. It is not typical for an addon developer to maintain an addon more than a couple FS cycles. The addon eventually becomes outdated. New technologies arise and a more accurate addonn cant be done. It is not typical also for addon developers to recover an old project and rewrite it to new standards (well , PIC people did).So in not too much time maybe we get a cycle of an amazing A320 addon and the use of the PMDG 737 drops. And in the next cycle maybe another developer or PMDG themselves decide to rewrite the 737 and there the A320 goes.This is interesting for developers since they keep doing things that interest them and keep money getting in (most probably well deserved money if i bought their product). And is frustrating for users because they will have to decide between their favourite plane or the most advanced one and pay again.Once the 747 gets out i will drool with all its features but i wont touch it since I dont do many long haul flights. I got illusionated once i read PMDG used an architecture that easily let them retrofit new developments into old products.Personally i would like more for addon developers to stick to a restricted number of addons and give them a longer life, evolve and improve them over the years (as it is common in software development) than to (to my opinion) too easily drop one product and go for another. I would buy PMDG 737 2.0 for an aditional fee proportinal to the new features. But i guess that is not how this bussiness model works. :(

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Nameless-(We have a requirement that all posters sign their names to their poasts... please adhere to this guideline!)We see lots of feedback in many forums about the price of addons, the insistance for free upgrades, updates between versions, adding features to old products that are developed for new products, etc....Unfortunately, in nearly all cases- the most vocal of posters are the ones with the least experience in business, but most especially in software development.There is no conceivable model in which the 737 series would be upgraded with new functionality at no cost. There is almost no conceivable scenario in which we would rewrite the airplane and offer an upgrade at significantly reduced cost.Why?It's a cost/benefit condition of time.The PMDG 747-400 is currently approaching 25,000 man-hours of development time. To put it another way, in order for you to work 25,000 hours, you would need to work 52 weeks a year, for 40hrs each week for TWELVE YEARS.We have a team of developers, but the development time is very heavily loaded toward code development. There are currently 6 developers working on code, and most of the coders work between 60-80hrs per week. (Those who have worked in code development know that there is no such thing as a 40hr week.... It takes far more dedication than that...)As the demands for more and more functionality go up- the development cycle gets longer and longer. The longer the cycle, the more development man-hours that are used- the higher the price must be to justify the develpment time.In order to run a viable business, you cannot be an altruist. As much as we'd like to toss all of the new technology into the 737- We currently estimate that such an endeavor would take approximately 15,000 man-hours. Or- to put it another way- the development team would need to focus on the update for a period of approximately 9 months- with no other projects on the table.If this approach were used- and the upgrade were sold at very low cost- or offered at no cost, PMDG would cease to exist as an entity before we could launch a following project.So- we have a cycle where development houses are constantly looking for NEW products to bring to market, rather than investing significant time and energy into upgrading older ones. This process has been a part of the MSFS process for many years- and I believe it will remain for many years to come.The deceptive part about the products provided in the sim market is this: If we were writing an email application or virus software, we would issue an updated version each biannual cycle at the original offering price. (ala: MSFS/Norton/Adobe/etc.) In the simulator market, which is highly price sensitive, there is a tendency to view the products in terms of the airplane modeled, and not the code base itself. So- instead of viewing the product cycle as, "Oh- my existing 7X7 sim is 2 years old- I'll get the update for the new technology and compatibility with the latest version of MSFS" there tends to be a backlash of angst and demands that such an update be given at no cost, as, after all, "it's still just a 7X7."This is not a bad thing, however- as there are constantly newer and better products coming to market from many different locations in the market.It is tremendously unfortunate that there is no easy way for a company like ours to give you a view as to what goes on in the development of a sophisticated airliner package like the 737, the LDS 767 or our 747-400. The preponderance of theft, illegal file sharing by individuals, VA's and other user groups, the requirements for dramatically increased functionality, product life span support, upgrades and the need to keep prices reasonably low in order to benefit the market put tremendous strain on the business model for company's like PMDG. Unfortunately, it is a side of the business model that is not often seen.Simulations like these are no longer the stuff of "weekend code jaunts." To produce a sophisticated 747-400 simulation requires teams of experts and consultants, tens of thousands of pages of data and specifications, tremendous perserverance and more work than most of us have contributed to nearly any project we've been involved with.At the end of the day- yes, we do truly enjoy this. ;-) Raising the bar to new heights is as fun for us as it is for you to get your hands on the product. This 747-400 simulator will exceed the expectations of even the most die-hard 747 fans- and will do it for about 1/4 the price that most of us paid for a good 747 simulator 8 years ago.Such is the way things work.

[Guest jacaru]

My name is Jaime. I know the signing guideline but I completly forgot since this is the only forum where the nick is not enough identity and me posting on many forums im not used to this guideline. Sorry, it was not my intention to offend you and I hope you understand I just forgot. Also I guess you will have to expect it happenning some times since it is not common.Also I didnt meant my post to sound as any kind of rant and i didnt mention that upgrades should be free or small cost ones. I am a developer just like you and I know somewhat how software bussiness models run. Things cost what they cost. At the end you have to get a certain amount of profit for your working time whatever you spend it working on, either a new plane or an upgrade. This was not the point of my post.I would like me to buy a 737 and expect it to be maintained for a longer life-cycle, with improvements, updates and upgrades. I would like 737 1.0, 737 2.0, 737 3.0, etc... This is completly independant to the pricing. If it is not technicaly possible to evolve a product at the needed pace to keep the bussiness up, you can then go for a second product, a third, a fourth...but it not justifies forgetting about the first one. Dont tell me this is not possible from the bussiness point of view since it happens with thousands of software projects, being one man projects, small groups of developers or big companies. Piracy is over every piece of software, and i might add that there is a lot more loyalcy to FS addon developers from users than in any other software areas.I have PSS A320 too. Did a great job when i bought it. But has bugs, and many things could be improved. But again it has been completly dropped (development stopped less tha a year later of release). The code wont be touched any more. Now some other addon developer will have to spend full time to develop an A320 from 0. That developer does it because he knows PSS is now lacking. And it will happen again the same song, and a third A320 will be completly developed again. In total it is a lot of time wasted. If PSS would kept A320 upgraded some more the other addon developer would do another different products. So what we are stuck with is a lot of addon developers developing the same addons again and again on different timeframes.This is a personal feeling I am getting. Im not even stating which is good which is bad. I just would like more continuity on the products instead of volatile products. I bought windows 95, and then 98, and then XP, and there will be more to come. I have not been forced to switch to Linux because of a nice little feature i loved to use when windows XP didnt came. Imagine having to switch OS each couple of years.Now 747 comes with great features that 737 can have too but it is very possible the 737 wont be touched again and i will have to wait for someone else to do it (and what is worst, think it) from scratch. I dont have the right to tell PMDG what to do but i feel sad and i do have a point that can be discussed. Why there is no user fidelity based on a product instead of on a addon company in the FS addon world?Jaime.

[michal 44]

>Dont tell me this is not possible from the>bussiness point of view since it happens with thousands of>software projects, This is not one of the "thousands" of industrial software products, home simulation market is completely different, very price sensitive and very product-sensitive. So in fact what you advocate may NOT be possible. Folks here very quickly change their preferences, habits, likes and dislikes, abandon products, move to next ones, etc.. Look at the major titles in the PC gaming industry - they certainly do not follow your imagined "life-cycle" upgrade pattern. They release a title and are done with it. They may return with a sequel 3 years down the road but it will be a brand new product. What you want is fine with me but what really counts is what 10,000 other clients want. So yes, products are "volatile" because customers are like that.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

[Guest jacaru]

Partially true partially not. This is not only a game. As I see it, most frequently the product abandons the user than the other way around (i mean ones favourite product, not ones alternative product). Games have multiple versions, Quake I, II, III and IV, etc...same concept, updated game. Id software will be there for quake as long as people is interested and buy it. There are also expansion packs. So i dont think once a game is done they are done with it. Not even mentioning many games come with an SDK that make them user expandable.It is very rare for a software piece to be released, take a couple of udtates in a few months timeframe and then get completly dropped. But i agree with you and as I said on my first post maybe this is the best way this business can work for addon developers.So far PMDG as made a perfect work on the 737, released service updates and upgraded to 737-800/900. I wish i was interested in the 747 because it is going to be fantastic.So in a year, would you buy a new version of the 737 from PMDG? With IRS, independant FMS, feature complete FMS, weather radar, improved systems, and using new FS features when other addons are up to this standards. Or would you prefer PMDG to do a new 777 and expect other developer to write another 737 up to standards? Or maybe you will be happy with the 737 as is forever?What is the problem with an addon developer owning a set of products instead of each two years releasing a completly new one?Jaime.