If it costs $300,000 and earns $50,000 then it's lost $250,000 full stop.

...If you want to make a small fortune in aviation start with a big one. :(If I

Given that the Citation X 2.0 gauges are one file, I have to wonder how long it takes to open up 110,000+ lines of code in a single file...

Evidently, you know nothing at all about coding C++ multi-gauges. The CJ1+ v2.0 is no where near as complex as the CX v2.0 gauge system, yet it too consists of >80,000 lines of code, scattered amongst 56 source files... .cpp, .h. .rc, etc.We could not possibly use XML scripts for our projects. For one thing, XML doesn't support file I/O, nor does it support sounds without a "helper C gauge," among other things.

...If you want to make a small fortune in aviation start with a big one. :(If I

Evidently, you know nothing at all about coding C++ multi-gauges. The CJ1+ v2.0 is no where near as complex as the CX v2.0 gauge system, yet it too consists of >80,000 lines of code, scattered amongst 56 source files... .cpp, .h. .rc, etc.We could not possibly use XML scripts for our projects. For one thing, XML doesn't support file I/O, nor does it support sounds without a "helper C gauge," among other things.

Did you only read that one, and then not read what came after it? I was under the assumption that it was XML, I know about C++, including the various file types. I just am not that familiar with the FSX gauge system.

Did you only read that one, and then not read what came after it? I was under the assumption that it was XML, I know about C++, including the various file types. I just am not that familiar with the FSX gauge system.

Peter, I read all the messages before ever hitting the Reply button. You should know by now that it is never safe in public forums to assume anything... :( There are quite a few C++ gauges included in a default FSX installation, although since they are actually named with the correct extension (.dll) it may not have been all that obvious as was the case with FS9 and the .gau file extension.Yet another major reason for not using XML is the fact that they are completely transparent, meaning that there's no possible way to protect one's investment of time and skill.

More to the point, Ed is speaking of "opportunity costs." IOW, he could have made X number of dollars for the same investment of time had he been working as a salaried employee for some development house.I do contract work for other companies, and I do charge $60/hr for my work. It is that income that provides me the opportunity to invest my time in flightsim development, hoping for a long-term payoff... :(

Opportunity costs work in freeware two. After doing a freeware project that took me personally 2000 hours (and I only did 1/3 of the project) I realized I could not rationalize the loss of potential income for those hours anymore (let alone the toll on family life), and the countless hours of free support personal time that lasted the next 4-5 years.I don't see that in this sense freeware/payware are any different. Time is money. The main difference is you can't add insult to injury by stealing something that is free unless you consider fsplanet.com and seeing your free works sold on ebay which seems to be the counterpart to piracy.

Peter, I read all the messages before ever hitting the Reply button. You should know by now that it is never safe in public forums to assume anything... :( There are quite a few C++ gauges included in a default FSX installation, although since they are actually named with the correct extension (.dll) it may not have been all that obvious as was the case with FS9 and the .gau file extension.Yet another major reason for not using XML is the fact that they are completely transparent, meaning that there's no possible way to protect one's investment of time and skill.

I'm sorry, however my understanding was that C++ gauges, especially the .gau format, were being phased out with FSX.This is coming from someone who has minimal experience with FSX development. I'm sorry however my main focus has always been on the military aspect of simulation, not the civilian aspect, as such, I do not prefer FSX, as there is practically no combat mechanism at all. I have always been a combat simmer, and as such, all my focus on development has been focused around combat sims, not civilian flight sims, hence why I never bothered with FSX development much. The most I really ever did was screw with some alpha channels to fix some screw ups certain people did porting FS9 aircraft to FSX SP2.

hoping for a long-term payoff... :(

:( ah yes ... the FS addon developer millions ... LOL :( B) B) --

Peter: well it certainly takes aerosoft 6-12 months for their products... but then again they work based on the fact that they understand the VAST MAJORITY of customers are not interested in advanced systems and just want to have fun, and "complete a flight before dinner" :) Then again Aerosoft is top dog when it comes to project management.

More to the point, Ed is speaking of "opportunity costs." IOW, he could have made X number of dollars for the same investment of time had he been working as a salaried employee for some development house.

Whatever might be earned working in another job, the time spent is worth no more than someone (in this case an add-on developer) is prepared to pay for it. Most of us probably could have earned much more by working as lawyers or bankers. That doesn't mean our work is worth what we could have earned in those jobs - it's worth what we actually earned for it.

"Whatever might be earned working in another job, the time spent is worth no more than someone (in this case an add-on developer) is prepared to pay for it. Most of us probably could have earned much more by working as lawyers or bankers. That doesn't mean our work is worth what we could have earned in those jobs - it's worth what we actually earned for it."..and at some point in time, for both the payware and freeware developers-that amount-satisfaction for the freeware developer and satisfaction/monetary for the payware, is simply not worth it. I doubt many would continue to work a job that pays such a low hourly wage, or worse for free-they would look elsewhere for a different job.If one looks at the trends in payware recently, we have lost quite a few major developers. There must be a reason.

Whatever might be earned working in another job, the time spent is worth no more than someone (in this case an add-on developer) is prepared to pay for it. Most of us probably could have earned much more by working as lawyers or bankers. That doesn't mean our work is worth what we could have earned in those jobs - it's worth what we actually earned for it.

Actually, it does. The fact you choose to take a lower income or are forced to take a lower income doesn't mean the actual work performed is not actually of greater value.A person in China making $0.02 an hour doing the same job as someone in the U.S. getting paid $7.00 an hour... would you state that identical jobs with identical results are not of the same value?

Actually, it does. The fact you choose to take a lower income or are forced to take a lower income doesn't mean the actual work performed is not actually of greater value.A person in China making $0.02 an hour doing the same job as someone in the U.S. getting paid $7.00 an hour... would you state that identical jobs with identical results are not of the same value?

Is the value of the US worker $0.02/hour or is the value of the chinese worker $7.00/hour? Surely both are equally valid views.

Actually, it does. The fact you choose to take a lower income or are forced to take a lower income doesn't mean the actual work performed is not actually of greater value.A person in China making $0.02 an hour doing the same job as someone in the U.S. getting paid $7.00 an hour... would you state that identical jobs with identical results are not of the same value?

Is the value of the US worker $0.02/hour or is the value of the chinese worker $7.00/hour? Surely both are equally valid views.

Actually, it does. The fact you choose to take a lower income or are forced to take a lower income doesn't mean the actual work performed is not actually of greater value.A person in China making $0.02 an hour doing the same job as someone in the U.S. getting paid $7.00 an hour... would you state that identical jobs with identical results are not of the same value?

No these jobs are not identical nor of same value, by a long shot! Assuming the goods produced are for consumption in N. America or Europe, the cost of transportation of the product, might well mean that the Chinese labour rate is too high- ergo: that job is overvalued. That is- the US labour rate of $7.00 may actually be cheaper when all cost elements are considered.As the cost of oil- read transportation- climbs steadily in the future, we can expect to see much production leave Asia for factories closer to the point of consumption. Labour rates cannot be compared unless all cost components are considered.Alex Reid

No these jobs are not identical nor of same value, by a long shot! Assuming the goods produced are for consumption in N. America or Europe, the cost of transportation of the product, might well mean that the Chinese labour rate is too high- ergo: that job is overvalued. That is- the US labour rate of $7.00 may actually be cheaper when all cost elements are considered.As the cost of oil- read transportation- climbs steadily in the future, we can expect to see much production leave Asia for factories closer to the point of consumption. Labour rates cannot be compared unless all cost components are considered.Alex Reid

Don't confuse profit margins with value of labor itself. Tsk, tsk.