I think if you are sitting at an airport flying a virtual version of the flight you are about to board you qualify as a hard core simmer.

Yes! And you will be able to download the "Sim-Connect-For-Real" (a.k.a "FSUIPBoeing") add-on for Flight from the Marketplace to run on your iPad or iPhone and WiFi straight into the aircraft FMC for that "ubelievably real" sim experience!After so many years of flying, many pilots do get terribly bored with the task at hand and would rather spend time chatting-up the stewardesses, so they surely would have no problem temporarily handing control over to a flight enthusiast passenger in economy class running Flight with the Sim-Connect-For-Real add-on on his iPad. ("We have just started our descent into airport xxxx so all passengers please turn-off your electronic devices, except the passenger in seat 34B".)Cheers,- jahman.

:( Read the 10th post..... from Geroge....

Alain, you mention many times about being a business person and looking at things from a business perspective. Then you go and link THAT thread as "the proof". C'mon, you wouldn't be buying stock in that company based upon that statement, would you? BTW, reading the entire thread reminded me why I haven't and won't purchase any addons from certain dev sites. Thanks!Going back to Microsoft and their store and how all add-ons *must* be funneled through them, if I may? How is Microsoft suppose to handle that processing and support? And when will they be hiring the mass of people needed to ensure the proper quality of the add-on? That hiring process may open up some great opportunities for some hard-core simmers, because this wouldn't be a task for someone who's right off the street, would it? We're looking at a good year, maybe two for proper training into the intricacies of flying a 737NGX into a high end airport with real time weather and programmed failures. Don't ya think?And I shudder when I envision the fallout around the Flight Simulator world as "yet another forum" shuts down for lack of active participants, as all freeware has been scrapped. There's no ad revenue anymore, because it's ALL funneled through the MS store and many web sites can no longer afford to exist. Life will be one or two web forums from those privileged enough to have signed on early and (supposedly) been a part of the development process.But being the cynic that I am, I think most of those who are covertly proclaiming themselves to be the top rooster in the hen house are full of bolshoi. For there to be the belief that some top level add-on developers could somehow "educate" the team members at Microsoft is ridiculous. The team at Microsoft aren't graduates of Trade Tech's College of Computing, earn your degree in 6 months! Save for a few individuals in the FS community, there's not much that can be taught to the professionals who make Flight Simulator. Maybe give the team some ideas on how to make it better? Sure. But steer the development, yeah right...Gotta run. Need to go check the Microsoft job listings for those Quality Assurance Professional openings. Wonder if the hire old, cynical geezers? :(

Fr. Bill,Do you really think ANY documents were ready to be signed last August?No, I don't believe it for a minute.

...Going back to Microsoft and their store and how all add-ons *must* be funneled through them, if I may? How is Microsoft suppose to handle that processing and support? And when will they be hiring the mass of people needed to ensure the proper quality of the add-on?...

Checking conformance to specs can be automated, just as it has been for MB hardware maufacturers. Essentially you set-up a PC with Win 7, Flight (both loaded from a disk image), then install the add-on and check that:

1. Files not added to forbidden Flight directories,
2. No changes have been made to Flight native files (except for allowed changes to certain files),
3. No run-time memory leaks
4. No CTDs caused by the add-onThe uninstaller:
5. Delete all files added by the add-on
6. Undo all changes made by the add-on to the allowed set of editable files in Flight
7. Automatic checking for updates,
8. Key-less reinstalls,
9. Do not ask for location of Flight files /that's what the registry is for!),
10. Allow install on a drive/directory different from the location of Flight
11. Remembe the install location when re-installing or installing an update.Now:
12. Codesign the add-on with am RSA certificate specific to Flight, and
13. Design Flight to only load these codesigned add-ons.

See, not so hard at all.Cheers,- jahman.

Alain, you mention many times about being a business person and looking at things from a business perspective. Then you go and link THAT thread as "the proof". C'mon, you wouldn't be buying stock in that company based upon that statement, would you? BTW, reading the entire thread reminded me why I haven't and won't purchase any addons from certain dev sites. Thanks!Going back to Microsoft and their store and how all add-ons *must* be funneled through them, if I may? How is Microsoft suppose to handle that processing and support? And when will they be hiring the mass of people needed to ensure the proper quality of the add-on? That hiring process may open up some great opportunities for some hard-core simmers, because this wouldn't be a task for someone who's right off the street, would it? We're looking at a good year, maybe two for proper training into the intricacies of flying a 737NGX into a high end airport with real time weather and programmed failures. Don't ya think?And I shudder when I envision the fallout around the Flight Simulator world as "yet another forum" shuts down for lack of active participants, as all freeware has been scrapped. There's no ad revenue anymore, because it's ALL funneled through the MS store and many web sites can no longer afford to exist. Life will be one or two web forums from those privileged enough to have signed on early and (supposedly) been a part of the development process.But being the cynic that I am, I think most of those who are covertly proclaiming themselves to be the top rooster in the hen house are full of bolshoi. For there to be the belief that some top level add-on developers could somehow "educate" the team members at Microsoft is ridiculous. The team at Microsoft aren't graduates of Trade Tech's College of Computing, earn your degree in 6 months! Save for a few individuals in the FS community, there's not much that can be taught to the professionals who make Flight Simulator. Maybe give the team some ideas on how to make it better? Sure. But steer the development, yeah right...Gotta run. Need to go check the Microsoft job listings for those Quality Assurance Professional openings. Wonder if the hire old, cynical geezers? :(

There is no proof of anything in the thread I linked, only that George may have talked to soon, should we asked what was on his mind when he made that statement to see what will be his answer today if he answer at all?The devs. are not telling or educating MS about what to do but who's in better position if not the devs. to tell MS what will be the best thing to implement to make the sim. as good as possible, after all were we not all complaining to the devs. about the problems FSX was having and was it not the devs. who were complaining about the bugs and limitation of FSX regarding the development of their addons and how broken the FSK SDK was, and still is?MS did not become as big as they are by sharing the OS market with others, they took over and smashed the competition, do you really think MS was expecting the addons market for Flight to be that big, so what should happen if MS apply the same reasoning to all addons for Flight, should they release Flight's SDK and let all devs. do what they were doing before or should they make the SDK available only to the devs. who are welling to sell their addons in the store only, after all MS do not have to share the new SDK, do they? Your question....."How is Microsoft suppose to handle that processing and support?"....they won't, :( it will be up to the devs. to make sure of the quality of their addons if they "wanna" stay in business with MS, I'm sure every addons will be tested (by the dev. staff) before release in the store, after all their name is attached to their product and they want to sell as many addons as they can, I'm sure MS will not tolerate bad scenery or plane in their store.Edit: @ jahman.....:(

I just hope that Flight is so much different and better than FSX that add ons do not port. What that would mean is the sim would have moved to being more of a modern title and look and play like something which would more leading edge of 2011 rather than leading edge from the early 2000's. Really hope that MS truly modernizes the sim to take advantage of todays technology and surprises all of us.

What you see is what you get Mike, you're just setting yourself up for failure! I think the sim is looking good, we may get some improvement to the current screenies, but not a lot, so if you're not happy with the recent screenshots then my guess is you'll be disapointed come the release, which of course is absolutely rediculous! Microsoft have come a long way thus far and there still so much more to do, but don't expect this to look like a different sim to the one your seeing now, that's just not going to happen.Cheers,Dave.

If you look up Windows 8, it's features and goals, and it's anticipated release date, and then correlate this to what little MS has actually said so far about "Flight", this gets very interesting to me. It also may be a reason why they have said so little to date. We may all be flying in heavier clouds all the time than we expected.... :( Bob - Las Cruces, NM

:( Read the 10th post..... from Geroge.... http://www.flytampa....icrosoft+flight

That actually says nothing at all. Those who may have signed anything are explicitly forbidden from even saying that they have signed an NDA.Anyone who states that have signed an NDA for "MS Flight" is either (a) lying through their teeth, or (:( in serious violation of the NDA and will find their participation withdrawn without delay.

Fr. Bill,Do you really think ANY documents were ready to be signed last August?No, I don't believe it for a minute.

Of course I don't. That's the entire point.

Anyone who states that have signed an NDA for "MS Flight" is either (a) lying through their teeth, or (:( in serious violation of the NDA and will find their participation withdrawn without delay.

I'm not picking on you but it does not take a genius to know that about NDA so.....which one is it?

Fr. Bill,Do you really think ANY documents were ready to be signed last August?No, I don't believe it for a minute.

You all belive what you want, this is fine with me but for me, papers were signed before Flight was announced, maybe not from all dev. but IMO some did.

You all belive what you want, this is fine with me but for me, papers were signed before Flight was announced, maybe not from all dev. but IMO some did.

I agree fully with this statement. My company makes those involved with a new product sign NDAs BEFOERE the product is announced and the NDA specifically states that disclosure of the product or the subject matter is prohibited. Even after we publically announce the product we often keep those under NDA from even admitting they are part of the project for strategic reasons. From a competitive standpoint we don't want you to know who is helping develop the product because this tends to tip off the capabilities of the product a bit too much. The public and investors start reading too much into any partnerships and it becomes impossible to contain the gossip and rumor mill so we just shut everyone up until after product launch.Historically Microsoft has reached into the flight sim community to help develop MSFS (an example is Captain Sim) - I would imagine that to make Flight a success they would reach deeper to the talents of top tier scenery and aircraft developers as contractors on the Flight project. Likewise since MS is positioning an online store of course they have to give developers access to the guts of Flight because releasing a product that uses a store with nothing in it is a poor business choice. Take into account the ridiculously long development times for high fidelity MS products, if MS didn't engage the development community long before product launch, they would end up waiting years for products to show up in their store which would simply be a poor business choice. All indicators point to NDAs being signed long before WE (the poor, unwashed public) knew about Flight.

I agree fully with this statement. My company makes those involved with a new product sign NDAs BEFOERE the product is announced and the NDA specifically states that disclosure of the product or the subject matter is prohibited. Even after we publically announce the product we often keep those under NDA from even admitting they are part of the project for strategic reasons. From a competitive standpoint we don't want you to know who is helping develop the product because this tends to tip off the capabilities of the product a bit too much. The public and investors start reading too much into any partnerships and it becomes impossible to contain the gossip and rumor mill so we just shut everyone up until after product launch.Historically Microsoft has reached into the flight sim community to help develop MSFS (an example is Captain Sim) - I would imagine that to make Flight a success they would reach deeper to the talents of top tier scenery and aircraft developers as contractors on the Flight project. Likewise since MS is positioning an online store of course they have to give developers access to the guts of Flight because releasing a product that uses a store with nothing in it is a poor business choice. Take into account the ridiculously long development times for high fidelity MS products, if MS didn't engage the development community long before product launch, they would end up waiting years for products to show up in their store which would simply be a poor business choice. All indicators point to NDAs being signed long before WE (the poor, unwashed public) knew about Flight.

All of which is a good explanation of why some much anticipated addons for FSX have never materialized.AR

Ok Fr. Bill, if Orbx has not signed a non disclosure form then why would John from Orbx post this:Posted 17 August 2010 - 05:13 AM Let me state the Orbx position very quickly. Since ACES closed I have gone on record on many occasions to clearly state that we will continue to support the Microsoft platform, and only the Microsoft platform. Whilst we have been approached a number of times to port to X-Plane and look at other sim alternatives, my position as CEO has been clear: we're a Microsoft shop and will stay that way.Secondly, please do not ask us for more information, other than what Microsoft themselves have published (as they did today) on public sites for everyone to see. Whilst it's fun to speculate about this new platform, you need to understand we simply cannot say anything at this early stage. Please respect our wishes in that regard.Finally, we are 100% committed to releasing content for this new platform, in whatever guise that may be; of that you have our promise.

Hi,Because some developers started developing for other flight simulator programs and Orbix made that statement that they were sticking to development for the MS simulators only. Absolutely nothing in that announcement leads anyone to conclude that Orbix signed anything with MS.If people signed an NDA and then publicly stated such then they would have broken the NDA and face the chance of being removed. And John has been around long enough to know this.Can we also stop trying to use anything from last summer to explain anything that may be happening now?

Hi,Because some developers started developing for other flight simulator programs and Orbix made that statement that they were sticking to development for the MS simulators only. Absolutely nothing in that announcement leads anyone to conclude that Orbix signed anything with MS.If people signed an NDA and then publicly stated such then they would have broken the NDA and face the chance of being removed. And John has been around long enough to know this.Can we also stop trying to use anything from last summer to explain anything that may be happening now?

With all due respect I think you live in your own bubble, IMO George clearly spoke to soon, as for Orbx statement it's very clear, they simply cannot say anything at this early stage, why not, I mean if you'r not in the loop you just say "We don't know anything" and not "we cannot say anything".Before punishing somebody who broke a NDA with a company don't you have to find out who he or she is first, easy to say they will be punished but you need to find the culprit and if you don't there is nobody to punish.It's not about making conclusions and taking them to the bank as proof of how Flight will be but more about what's making sense and what does not and to me it does not make sense to make statement like George or Orbx did if you are not under any NDA period.