If you are frustrated and annoyed, it is entirely of your own doing by taking it upon yourself to defend the indefensible. By taking the tone that you have, in the above posts and in other threads, you make it sound like that you KNOW how things are going to be. Some of us have different views and there is no need for you to be annoyed by our posts.I am going to let this go, because there is no point having a discussion with someone who will argue that "I did not mention 'cars', I said vehicles" and thinks that this makes a significant difference to the subject at hand.

Finally, MS can open a store. I am not disputing that. I am however amused that you think that it will be filled with add-ons that we, the "not the target audience" would buy.IF there is a store on release day, it will have a few products that the "target audience" might buy after they had their fill of the default scenery and planes. Of course, YOU might be interested in such things, but I bet that most people reading this forum are not.

I would agree with you if we were to assume that the developers (some) were not in the loop with MS from the beginning, I would agree with you if we were to assume that Flight was business as usual but knowing that Flight will be an entirely new breed of virtual flight one is to assume that Flight will not be business as usual and that's what Jamie is also understanding, correct me if I'm wrong Jamie.Trust me on this one, not all but some of the developers knew what was up with MS from the beginning and by beginning I mean since Aces was closed, can you blame them, after all the sales of addons is their bread and butter.Just ask yourself this, why in hell is Aerosoft not on board with Flight, it's not like they did not support MSFSX before right, if their FSX addons were to be compatible with Flight (for a small fee like some would like to see that happening) and by doing so making more money with the same addons and new one do you really think they will pass on that deal???What can be the BIG difference this time for Aerosoft to baill out from MS, can it be the way MS will conduct their business Flight wise, is it possible that Aerosoft do not want to give up their own way of doing business as far as addons are involved and please don't tell me it's because they choose to go with Xplane-10 as they can surely support both platform.You want to belive that Flight will still be business as usual is ok with me.....more power to you....

If you are frustrated and annoyed, it is entirely of your own doing by taking it upon yourself to defend the indefensible. By taking the tone that you have, in the above posts and in other threads, you make it sound like that you KNOW how things are going to be. I do not know everything, but I base my statement on what the MS Flight team have told us.Some of us have different views and there is no need for you to be annoyed by our posts. - Nope, just yours.I am going to let this go, because there is no point having a discussion with someone who will argue that "I did not mention 'cars', I said vehicles" and thinks that this makes a significant difference to the subject at hand. Please don't quote me and leave out a large chunk of what I actually said. That quote can be taken completely out of context.

Thank you.Jamie ♥

Jamie, different is good......:(

@Jamie, your post was right above mine, I saw no point in quoting the whole thing again.@Alain, I cannot speak to what some developers know or don't know. I don't see how you can. However, I do know, that just a few months ago a number of developers --- who should have been contacted by MS --- stated that they have not signed any NDAs and that they know as much as we do.You are speculating about Aerosoft's reasons to not support Flight and I am not sure how you can be so sure of your reasoning, given the lack of information on the matter.

I do know this, and I can see that some other developers are reading this thread at the same time: SDKs are NOT released too much before the product is released. There are reasons for this that I won't go into here, but if ANYONE thinks that the SDK is going to be released way before Flight is released and that all these wonderful 3rd party programs are going to be available the day/week/month that Flight is released, well you are going to be totally wrong. Are there some basic things known ahead of time? Yes, there will be and we can use that information, but ground up built, brand new material is going to take much longer than that.

I do know this, and I can see that some other developers are reading this thread at the same time: SDKs are NOT released too much before the product is released. There are reasons for this that I won't go into here, but if ANYONE thinks that the SDK is going to be released way before Flight is released and that all these wonderful 3rd party programs are going to be available the day/week/month that Flight is released, well you are going to be totally wrong. Are there some basic things known ahead of time? Yes, there will be and we can use that information, but ground up built, brand new material is going to take much longer than that.

Thank you for correcting me :) , but I imagine the stuff that will most likely be in the store when it is released would be created by the Microsoft Flight team anyway. Jamie ♥

@Alain, I cannot speak to what some developers know or don't know. I understand.I don't see how you can. I have to plead the fifth on this one... :( However, I do know, that just a few months ago a number of developers --- who should have been contacted by MS --- stated that they have not signed any NDAs and that they know as much as we do. Read my post again, I said (some)You are speculating about Aerosoft's reasons to not support Flight and I am not sure how you can be so sure of your reasoning, given the lack of information on the matter. Fair enough, I'm open to ear a better reason or speculation to the one I gave.

Geez Louise, dont you folks (Alain, Jaime, Brandon) ever get tired of chasing each other around in circles over speculation?Seriously, I dont understand how you folks have the energy to argue over the same stuff day in and day out, or for that matter seem to enjoying doing so.

Thank you for correcting me :) , but I imagine the stuff that will most likely be in the store when it is released would be created by the Microsoft Flight team anyway. Jamie ♥

So now MS is programming Flight and Flight add-ons? I think not. There is way too much to do just with Flight and the SDKs. Also, besides Acceleration which some may call an add-on, when was the last time MS released an add-on for any version of FS? Would it be the scenery areas for FS5 that were on 3.5 floppies under the Mallard company?

So now MS is programming Flight and Flight add-ons? I think not. There is way too much to do just with Flight and the SDKs. Also, besides Acceleration which some may call an add-on, when was the last time MS released an add-on for any version of FS? Would it be the scenery areas for FS5 that were on 3.5 floppies under the Mallard company?

You don't need to reply to me like a cheeky monkey, treat me with some respect please.That was my opinion. I think that the store will be kick started with some freeware things on it like e.g. Meigs Field scenery, but that is only what I believe will happen, some will no doubt disagree (and I'm totally fine with that). Also, you reference to the past like its just going to be another repeat of history, what if its not? Just because you may be associated with the development of FS in the past, doesnt mean that you are always right! Are we not allowed to voice our own opinions? I respect your opinions and your knowledge... please respect mine. Jamie ♥

My opinion is that Windows 8 is going to be released next week, August 4th to go along with the PMDG release and Flight a week later. That's my story and I am sticking to it! Also, it is my opinion that the sun will come out tomorrow!! Let's see if I am right!!!

My opinion is that Windows 8 is going to be released next week, August 4th to go along with the PMDG release and Flight a week later. That's my story and I am sticking to it! Also, it is my opinion that the sun will come out tomorrow!! Let's see if I am right!!!

ahahahah! Your a joker! You really got me! Jamie ♥

Answer this then; what if the tools that are being created to develop add-ons become much easier to use?

There is no way at all that a tool will automate the manual task of drawing polygons to recreate an aircraft exterior and VC in great detail. All a more sophisticated flight simulator allows is for more work to be done, hence a longer time for development, hecne a higher price to charge for the add-on to recoup the investment (inless offset by higher unit sales).

Unless you know (and with good evidence) that the tools that are being used are the same, or more complex than before... you can not say that it necessarily takes longer to develop something the more complex it is.

Believeing some sort of a new tool will significantly speed add-on aircraft design is just plain fantasy.

Also, it depends on the size of the development team, a smaller team will take longer to make an add-on. That's just common sense.

You are obviously not in the software business. The idea that throwing more people at a software project will speed development has been debunked 35 years ago in The Myhtical Man-Month, a book that would be your bible if you were in any way even remotely connected to software development and project management, two skills essential for successfuol bleeding-edge aircraft add-on construction.

...I imagine the stuff that will most likely be in the store when it is released would be created by the Microsoft Flight team anyway.

You are completely wrong because you don't realize FS is an operating system for flight sim for others to populate with add-ons. Microsoft has never developped serious add-ons for FS, whether scenery or aircraft, and even the better-looking add-ons in FSX like the F-18 were developped by outside companies. All MS is interested in is providing basic scenery and aircraft so the sim engine in question is useable out-of-the-box. (As an aside, MS's aircraft design skills are so poor that for a constant speed reciprocating engine FSX reduces manifold pressure as propeller RPM is decreased when exactly the oppsote should occur.)

I think that the store will be kick started with some freeware things on it like e.g. Meigs Field scenery

That's a great example you got there. I can guarantee Meigs Field will not be offered by MS as a part of Flight simply because Meigs Field was closed in 2003 and no longer exists. But if you want to land your aircraft here, be my guest.Finally, please do try to make an effort to reply outside of a quote as it makes it difficult to reply to your posts. Thank you!Cheers,- jahman.

Quoting your previous post:"There is no way at all that a tool will automate the manual task of drawing polygons to recreate an aircraft exterior and VC in great detail. All a more sophisticated flight simulator allows is for more work to be done, hence a longer time for development, hecne a higher price to charge for the add-on to recoup the investment (inless offset by higher unit sales)". I never said that a program would automate the drawing of the aircraft, silly toot. I was just saying that if more advanced things such as: Actual reflections of the surrounding environment on the skin of the aircraft created not by alpha channel, but instead an integrated part of the engine.Advanced colour grading and shading as part of the lighting engine, not the texture. A more intuitive and possibly more easy to use SDK. They are just some examples of possible ways which MS could make it easier for the developer, to develop stuff. These are things that I have thought of that seem really reasonable, even though I am not a developer myself. I'm not saying these WILL make a huge difference if implemented, but its more of a starting point on which people can imagine the other ideas, with their own knowledge of development in FS. Lets be honest, there are some annoyances in how e.g. FSX aircraft add-ons are created, PMDG have said plenty of times that there is limitations of FSX. If less things are needed to be done to get an add-on on the shelf (with the same amount of detail - possibly more) than I BELIEVE that this could be the case. "Believing some sort of a new tool will significantly speed add-on aircraft design is just plain fantasy". Not a new tool, just a better one. I will find the example of what I mean, I cant think of its name at this time. But, if a tool is less complicated to use, or to learn... how wouldn't that speed up development? I don't understand your logic. "You are obviously not in the software business. The idea that throwing more people at a software project will speed development has been debunked 35 years ago in The Myhtical Man-Month, a book that would be your bible if you were in any way even remotely connected to software development and project management, two skills essential for successfuol bleeding-edge aircraft add-on construction". So your telling me that e.g. the small team which creates Quality Wings add-ons wouldn't create add-ons faster if they had a larger team? Show me a study, with a large sample size, by a reliable source (one which I can more easily assess, I really cant be bothered to read a book to just prove a point) that justifies your point. "You are completely wrong because you don't realize FS is an operating system for flight sim for others to populate with add-ons. Microsoft has never developped serious add-ons for FS, whether scenery or aircraft, and even the better-looking add-ons in FSX like the F-18 were developped by outside companies. All MS is interested in is providing basic scenery and aircraft so the sim engine in question is useable out-of-the-box. (As an aside, MS's aircraft design skills are so poor that for a constant speed reciprocating engine FSX reduces manifold pressure as propeller RPM is decreased when exactly the oppsote should occur.)" My point was only my opinion, I have reason to believe its true. You do not, which is fair considering the circumstances. But we can only wait and see, cant we! Take Hong Kong Kai Tak, for an example. That is a big part of aviation history, because of its amazing approach conditions. That was closed down, but I will bet money on it, that a add-on development team will no doubt make that as a scenery add-on. Meigs Field was a staple part of the FS history, I just think that it seems likley that it will be part of the store, early on and created by MS. That is my opinion, respect that. "That's a great example you got there. I can guarantee Meigs Field will not be offered by MS as a part of Flight simply because Meigs Field was closed in 2003 and no longer exists. But if you want to land your aircraft here, be my guest. I never said it would be part of Flight to begin with". I said it would be an optional add-on, to kick start the store. Yet again this is my opinion, its something I think will likely happen, I may or not have a source for this, but its not worth quoting... or mentioning, and besides, its my opinion.There ya go! I think I did what you asked, I'm not to sure what you meant though! Jamie ♥