Microsoft

[bobbyjoh 11]

After first reading the article about APL and APL/32 I was amazed at the assertion that loosing it in FS2004COF would be a setback.First, I have not flown a single adventure in FS2002, there is no need to do it my estimation. I fly on average with the PIC767, Radar Contact and either FSMeteo or ActiveSky over a 300 flights per year. Thats just short of one per daySecond as a beta tester and constant user of Radar Contact, I find that flying an adenture over and over with its predictable flights nothing short of boring and a total lack of realism. The Radar Contact team has for some time discussed the many limitations of working programs "inside" of the MSFS envirionment as APL adventure programs do. Radar Contact, along with most weather programs run in their own environrment outside of MSFS. Radar Contact written in Visual Basic (VB), has much more latitude for programming excellence than anything written in APL. Conditional statements based on a wide range of variables can now be programmed into the MSFS environment from an outside program, as Radar Contact does RIGHT NOW.Third, as a APL programmer I understand your lament, but I belive with the exposure on the front page of AVSIM and then your long description of adventures in MSFS, you have mis-lead a lot of flight simmers. A more accurate description of your article should have been MS removes a programing language in COF.Progress always leaves someone or something old behind. FS2004COF does that very thing to APL.Bob JohnsonDenver, CO

[Guest]

Cool, because that was all the article was getting at. To encourage people to expand their enjoyment in ways they have not in case (and every sign is that it probably will be so by Microsoft's own words) that they choose to stop supporting APL and APLC32. Really nothing more than that.

[Guest]

Bob, I could not say that they have removed it - only that it probably will be removed since MS has already announced what they see is a replacement language. I know of many people who have lobbied to MS that they do keep it and I have written them once on the subject. It's possible they might keep it in. My suggestion to them was to leave it intact but give the opportuity, if possibe, to run it parallel with the AI and have an option to toggle the AI on or off. Those that have been misled simply didn't read the whole article. From the last paragraph:"While you

[bobbyjoh 11]

Ralph,Your points are well taken, and belive me, I am not knocking you and the many people who like the MSFS adventures.Let me state real simple my points. First FSUIPC a module in MSFS now done by my good buddy Pete Dowson is a main stay of the FS2XXX world. Like it or not, it is a major piece of progrmming for our community.Second, once you except the premis of FSUIPC, lets get on with the world of today. I just flew a flight tonight from KLAX to PHNL with the PIC 767. I used Radar Contact for ATC, Active Sky,wxre version 1.8 for weather (only for some test I am doing), along with FS Real Time to keep track of time. I had conditions that were current as of today April 30th 2003. Not anything of the past, but RIGHT NOW. You cannot do that with a adventure APL. That is the problem, APL adventures are done for enjoyment for a moment in time in the past. It is not REAL TIME. Ralph, I am on "old" Guy, but I learned to live the computer world in "REAL TIME". APL does NOT allow that to happen.On my flight I just discussed, KLAX to PHNL I got dynamic conditions of TODAY. You can't do that with adventures. They are what they are, accurate when you did them, a week ago, a month ago or what ever. That is NOT the real world today in MSFS.My point to this thread, you hanging on to a dying past. APL is a dead program language. The current environemt in MSFS is current data, live and online or a program that can deliver current data LIVE.I hope I am not beating a dead horse, but please don't lead the un-informed simmers down a path that is old and tired. Live and fly outside of the "box", we are all into NEW stuff.Don't want to rant any more than I have.CheersBob Johnson

[Guest]

[Rant On]Ok, maybe I was too subtle in my first post and I'm going to rant now for a moment so don't mind me. I'll also make it my one and only rant.Ralph, yes I have flown adventures...but not for a LONG time. Why? Because they are old technology. I load up flight sim, FS Meteo, and Radar Contact (or fly online - VATSIM), and I've already established a better and more realistic environment than 95% of adventures out there.I did go to your website, and I looked at the products. I respect yours, and the developers efforts, and you should be proud of your products. But the fact of the matter is, a combination of FS Meteo (or one of the many other popular real-time weather add-ons), and Radar Contact will give me 98% of what your adventure will do. Really, the ONLY thing I could not account for between the functionality of FS2002, FS Meteo, Radar Contact, and a panel with the freeware pushback gauge against your adventure was highly specialized ATC chatter (with Australian accents I presume).Now, weigh that against the fact that with your adventure, I can only fly between two specific airfields...Adelaide to Melbourne. Alright, I'm only going to do that once or twice. After that, I don't care how different you randomize the weather, departure & arrival runways and all the other "goodies", I'm still going to be just as eager to fly somewhere else for once. Can I do that with your latest adventure offering? Nope. But I can fly anywhere in the world I want with 98% of the functionality your adventure offers.So, overall, it's quite a nice product I suppose, and I completely respect the effort put into the 10,000 lines of code and time required to produce it. Unfortunately, the product is old technology...and Microsoft DIDN'T, and ISN'T killing it. Your peers are. They are coming up with new and better ways of doing things - the reason doesn't matter, just the results. And they are programming in Java while you try to save COBOL. Sorry, that's just the way I see things.You reiterated that the whole point of your letter was to address the fact that ABL does not support the things APL did/does. That's most likely true. Is that a step back for Microsoft? Absolutely not. Microsoft knows exactly what's going on in the add-on community. They see that add-on products are being developed and integrated into their product WITHOUT the use of APL or ABL for that matter, and exceed what could have been done with those languages in the first place. You think they're going to waste budget dollars on improving the products APL/ABL support when 80+% of their market is more interested in, say, I don't know, improved textures or something like that? Heck no! Ultimately, I don't believe for one second Microsoft is "restricting" their product version by version to the add-on community. I do believe they focus their efforts on what the majority of the market is asking for, and try to find the best balance between improving native features while attempting to maintain SDK/API capabilities and backward compatibility for the add-on community.Maybe someone should write an open letter advising the community to what they might be missing in FS Meteo (including many other great wx programs), Radar Contact, VATSIM (and other online ATC organizations). Hey, now that's an idea...[Rant Off]Well, that's it for me on the topic, and hopefully I didn't push things too far - I certainly don't mean to because I do ultimately respect your work - I also believe that change is not always a bad thing.Respectfully,Joe Miller

[Chris Willis 8]

Joe, You hit the nail on both of your post and you will find the adventure files are the LOWEST files released ever in fs98,fs2000/fs2002 and way less downloaded files compare to any others addons in Msfs.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Guest]

>the adventure files are the LOWEST files released ever in>fs98,fs2000/fs2002 and way less downloaded files compare to>any others addons in Msfs.I would like to invite Mr. Willis to make a comparison of the number of downloads of his own uploads to the AVSIM library and compare that to the downloads for certain adventures.I think it will be very revealing, especially if used as a measure of a files worth (not a good thing IMHO).No, Thank youFermin Fernandezhttp://fsadventures.net

[Guest]

Joe, I very much respect your opinion. But nowhere in the editorial did I say that adventure programming was a replacement for VATSIM, or FSMETEO or RADAR CONTACT. All I said was it was another type of experience that was unigue to flight simulator and may be lost if Microsoft chooses to stop supporting it. Because some of the cool things we could do in APLC can't be done in ABL and that people should give these unigue experience a try before thay may not be able to. I really find it rather amusing that the folks who speak out againt adventure programming are the ones who haven't or don't fly them. In my editorial I did not put down anyone or anything, nor did I bash the new technology or the progress forward. I am looking forward to Century of Flight with the same enthusiam that I have for every version of Flight Simultor going back to FS4 and even before that. That article also did not speak out against change or progress, nor did it beg Microsfot not to change. All I said was give these types of experiences a chance before it's lost. Nothing more.Respectfully,Ralph Zimmerman

[Guest]

Good of you to step in here, George with some very valid points about APLC and multiplayer capabilility.Without APL and APLC we would not have had ProFlight or the 1st Radar Contact either - two products that were huge sucesses. The only people who speak out against adventures (and the unique expoeriences that they bring to the desktop) are the ones who haven't flown them.

[Guest]

Chris, this is not based solely on speculation. The quote from the FS2002 ABL SDK says that ABL is a replacement language for APL. Microsoft, in the compatibility statement for Century of Flight said that planes and scenery would be compatible but did not promise compatibility of anything else.Those are both statements of fact put forth by Microsoft. How could you possibly call that speculation. And, both of those quotes appeared in the editotial.

[Guest]

Joe, The conclusion to my editorial was contained in the last two paragraphs "Anyone who calls themselves simulator pilots who has not been exposed to this brand of ultra-reality needs to do so before it's too late and this chapter of flight simulator closes. For if Microsoft continues heading in the direction most of us believe that it is in Century Of Flight ( it already started with FS2002), the ability to do the types of things that brought Real Air Traffic Control, stimulating adventures and real time flights to your desktop may be lost forever in the form of real flights and exciting APLC adventures. Time to stop playing and start flying before it's too late.While you're waiting for Century of Flight, as I am, and all that it promises, take the time to search out APL and APLC32 adventures and fly them before it's to late. Search the archives at the popular sites,and fly some of the very best flight simulator experiences you can have in the form of compiled adventures. You'll be glad you did."I never said that adventures were a replacement for anything, just another form of enjoyment that is often overlooked and may be gone if Microsoft stops support.Respectfully,Ralph

[Guest]

Gary, I never said one was better thatn the other, nor did I make any attempt to put down VATSIM or any of the other technology that is out there now or may deveolop or emerge. The reality of the situation is simply that APLC and APLC32 adventures brought some unique experiences to the deskyop that cannot be done in ABL, their new language and that in case Microsoft chooses to stop supporting it, people should try to experience them if they want to try a different type of real flight experience. Never did I say that adventures were a replacement or better than anything else - just different and unique. The people who cricize them are the same people who don't fly them.Respectfully,Ralph Zimmerman

[Guest]

Thanks for additional perspective you added, Barry. I've been amused at all that people have chosen to read into what I wrote that isn't there. Bottom line is that people who criticise and holler the lodest are the same ones who say they don't fly and won't fly adventures. Most point to something that is better in their opinion such as VATSIM or the like. I never tried to say that what we were able to do in APLC or APLC32 was better than or a replacement for anything. Just that it was different and folks should try before it could be too late.But, you know that since you've flown the two and can compare. Respectfully,Ralph Zimmerman

[Guest]

Hi AndrewI appreciate you question on explaing what this is all about concerning keystrokes etc but It's a bit long to answer here in the forum. The best way to experience something is simply to try it. My advice would be to to www.fsadventures.net and simply try some of the adventrures there. You can also look for adventures here on avsim.com as there are severeal and some demo's also tto try. You can also go to www.realatc.com and on the front page is a link to download the the manual for Three Real Flights and by reading through it you've have an idea of what it's all about. The best way to experience anything is simply to try it. Most who criticise what adventure programmers have brought to the table through APL and APLC32 adventure programming are the same ones who haven't even tried them.Respectfully,Ralph Zimmerman

[Guest]

Hi All. This thread caught my interest as Im a designer and have been for around 7 years in the cfs community, I have recently moved over to the Fs community. I think there will be many more'unpopular'changes to the fs series as the progression of new editions pushes foreward.If you go to differant Cfs sites and read old threads that were posted just before the release of cfs3 you will see much speculation and alot of fear of the new flight sims set up for add-on capability.Alot of people 'designers' were just sticking their heads in the sand and saying 'of course addons will be ok... 'then came cfs3.... now look at that community, its starved for addons, I have a commercail outlet, we build very high end detailed aircraft. We moved over to fs2004 the day it(cfs3) was released.( I had a forglimps of the sim 2 weeks beofre release, I then made the descision to move to fs2002) We felt from the look of the way M$ did things it was just not worth the work to build for it any more for the amount of sales we would get,not that there was alot anyways.7 months later I look back and I see just a couple or a few commercail addons and not even 1% of the freeware that is STILL being built for cfs2.And its not hard to see why...just one flying area of the world, Europe, messed up flight models, no good Gauge flying capabilties, and hard to addon in features for addons... In short the cfs3 community seams to be dead. Its interesting to note that requests for new cfs2 and cfs1 projects..even commercailly has jumped through the roof, Abacus just re-released their old cfs1 addons again.. could people be just saying "the heck with this Im going back?"Now... I shudder at the thought of the new fs flight sims comming from M$ will follow the same pattern... this is just one area( the authors suject), it will move to others in time. As for the stock adventures.. I think it would be a huge loss to the sim for NEW flight sim inducties as they would not have a nice easy ready made introduction to flight sim as it has had for some time. Lets face it, most of us never have flown a plane, for those guys I would say 75% dont care as much about very complicated navigation and procedures, I my self BECAME that way after years and many differant series of fs and cfs were introduces, it did not happen right off. And new blood keeps us and this community alive.As for the origional authors notes, he is right in my opinion as this leads me to ask of M$ ' Ok ... so what are you takeing away next?'Like the old song says " One thing leads to another".This is Microsoft remember....All in all I feel this next series will be good, but the direction make me nervous.Could it be time for a enterprizeing new group to take Que and just show up and make it right with a new song...T.WoodsimTECH Flight Desing.Ltdwww.simtechflightdesign.com