Cant you continue discussing this in the P3D forum?Its no use here, and nobody can change it anyway. For LM we are nothing.

While I don't work for PMDG... I can probably safely state that probably not... entire systems from one end of the aircraft to the other don't have to be built from the ground up in FS. A great deal of the base system behavior is built into FS... it's just the technical details that need fluffing up a tad. In X-Plane... there's pretty much nothing.

Completely and utterly incorrect.In X Plane, there is a very large list of datarefs (data references) that enable an aircraft to have all its systems. These are part of the core code of x plane and they are what developers use to make add ons.http://www.xsquawkbo...s/DataRefs.htmlThey are simplified (not simple) to cover as many aircraft as possible. The SDK is provided to make modifications and add variables to these datarefs, as well as customize whatever else needs customizing so they work in a specific way.If you think we can't do in X Plane what other developers can do in FSX, you are VERY mistaken.

I really don't understand this sudden interest in corporate contracts? There was no interest whatsoever from Xplaners towards P3D before todate and now? Hmm...makes me think.

Honestly, it has nothing to do with X-Plane specifically. It's just that before today, Flight was the expected upgrade path for fans of FSX, and Prepar3D was going to remain a niche product of only passing interest to the enthusiast community. Now that all the FSX fans feel utterly let down by Microsoft, they're suddenly pinning their hopes and dreams on Lockheed Martin, and with this increased interest will likely come increased scrutiny from Microsoft's legal department. It's just something worth considering is all.As for previous statements from Lockheed Martin, all that really means is "We can't get in trouble for anything we've done" and not necessarily "Things will never change in the future." For instance, Microsoft could put pressure on LM to increase the monthly cost, or eliminate that option altogether. The bottom line is that Prepar3D was never intended to be a consumer level product, and there are no guarantees that it will always be easily accessible to consumers in the future.

Edited January 6, 201214 yr by Mountain Man

That's what I've been sying all along!. What matters is what the EULA states - nothing else.You've lost sight of my original point. I think we can all assume that the MS/LM agreement prohibits using P3D (ESP) for personal/entertainment purposes. If MS felt its intersts in Flight are being threatened by P3D being used for those purposes then I suggest it would have an arguable case against LM for breaching the agreement. The grounds for this would be that by selling P3D to anyone prepared (sorry!) to pay for it and simply relying on the wording of the EULA LM not taking effective steps to ensure it isn't being used for personal/entertainment purposes and was, in effect, concouraging it. John Nichol's reported comments could be cited in support of this.The outcome could be LM having to take action against developers using P3D for personal/entertainment purposes, which, you must agree, is clearly in breach of the EULA.

You are having a guess but once again it can be turned around. LM probably paid serious money to Microsoft for the ESP license which Microsoft must be laughing at because they are letting their Fsx users breach their Eula and use Fsx commercially. That is against the Fsx Eula. Microsoft are Having their cake and eating it too. Why do you not have an opinion on that? If I had paid microsoft a lot of money for the commercial rights to a platform I would not be happy if Microsoft let it's users breach their Eula and set up pay by the hour flight sim joyrides in every mall. Your argument goes both ways but you seem to have an agenda to push it only one way.

I found this discussions about EULAs enterteaining but it has become repetitive.Bottom line is: LM legal dept has said that LM can do this: Sell P3D licenses to anybody willing to pay $500. They also say that LM can legally "rent" a developer's license for $10 a month (which actually gives you two licenses so you can do multiplayer development), with the caveat that if you want to deploy P3D to a customer, you will have to pay $500 per machine.If MS will do anything, it will be to kick themselves in the butt. MS has been trying to get people pay them "rent" instead of purchasing a license and now it seems that LM has hit the "sweet spot" that allows them: get developers (harnesing the cloud if I can say that) and at the same time.a constant revenue stream. P3D will be upgraded always, because comercial customers will demand it.

There was an offering from Lockheed Martin in the Computer Pilot Magazine (Jul/Aug 2011 Volume 15 Issue 4). But who reads the Computer Pilot Magazine - customers or developers?for more info: http://www.prepar3d.com/computerpilot/That's why I think that Lockheed Martin knows, that here is a flightsim-community waiting for something to replace FSX.I hope, they'll make us an offer too. But X-Plane 9 is very good too. You just need the right addon (BK-117, CRJ200) and you will forget every prejudice you had before.

You are having a guess but once again it can be turned around. LM probably paid serious money to Microsoft for the ESP license which Microsoft must be laughing at because they are letting their Fsx users breach their Eula and use Fsx commercially. That is against the Fsx Eula. Microsoft are Having their cake and eating it too. Why do you not have an opinion on that? If I had paid microsoft a lot of money for the commercial rights to a platform I would not be happy if Microsoft let it's users breach their Eula and set up pay by the hour flight sim joyrides in every mall. Your argument goes both ways but you seem to have an agenda to push it only one way.

You have still misunderstood my point and the fact that this discussion is about P3D, not FSX - though others haven't.The risk is that if MS gets concerned about P3D being used to develop add-ons for personal/entertainment purposes in breach of the MS/LM agreement it can put presure on LM to stop it. LM will probably terminate the licences of the offending developers, unless it is prepared to fight MS in court in defence of developers who are breaching their EULAs. That's unlikely so, at present, there can be no long-term assurance about developing P3D add-ons for personal/entertainment purposes.How do you know that those who set up pay by the hour flight sim joyrides don't have commercial licences from MS? Would you invest in equipment and leases in a business that could be destroyed by a letter from MS?

As someone pointed out earlier: the Prepar3d EULA is off-topic here! Yes, I've written about it myself some posts ago, but this should be moved to the P3D forum!Best regards,Peter

How do you know that those who set up pay by the hour flight sim joyrides don't have commercial licences from MS? Would you invest in equipment and leases in a business that could be destroyed by a letter from MS?

Even if they didn't have a commercial license that doesn't make it right for anyone else to break an EULA. Using that logic is like saying: well if thousands of people are downloading illegal software via certain torrent sites, than it must be okay for everyone.

Yea I am getting a little sick of the pseudo lawyers trolling around here. EULA this and EULA that... All that matters is the EULA between LM and yourself, if you don't feel comfortable with that EULA don't purchase it, simple as that... Stop trying to play lawyer simulator 2012 and analyzing if LM is in some kind of legal fiasco.

If you think we can't do in X Plane what other developers can do in FSX, you are VERY mistaken.

Really... I've looked at the currently available payware and freeware for X-Plane. Not seeing anything even remotely as detailed as the Eaglesoft Citation X v2... let alone anything that even comes close to what PMDG creates for FSX. Nothing.We're not talking GA aircraft here.

Really... I've looked at the currently available payware and freeware for X-Plane. Not seeing anything even remotely as detailed as the Eaglesoft Citation X v2... let alone anything that even comes close to what PMDG creates for FSX. Nothing.We're not talking GA aircraft here.

I agree it isn't there yet, but saying just because it hasn't been done means it can't be done is a little foolish IMHO...

If I am a payware developer I am looking at the scenery and evaluating the path to take. You have a piece of software in P3D that half of an already small community even knows about, and the other half are on the fence to even spend the money to use it. You have another piece of software in MS Flight that will never be as deep as its former self (even though it runs so silky smooth on highest everything...)And you have another piece of software in XPX that in my opinion has been pushed aside out of a lack of need. I think everyone here agrees that FSX is the best potential flight sim of our lifetime, it was deep but ohhh how the code left us hanging, unless LM can cater more toward enthusiasts I just don't see how a 3rd party developer makes it in an already tight marketplace... I think you have to either charge a lot more for your product and stick with P3D or move to XPX and reach a wider audience, and that is just to stay stagnant.

As one who's gone over this stuff from the programmer's point... I'll tell you when you compare FS to X-Plane... FS beats the snot out of X-Plane for development ease. Hands down.There is a lot that X-Plane doesn't support... and I'd probably lose what's left of my hair trying to get X-Plane to behave when it comes to such things as FADEC (they aren't all exactly how Austin programmed it). VNAV and FLC autopilot functionality... though to be honest that wasn't easy in FS either. I could go on and on and on... but honestly... X-Plane is not set up to willingly support and handle complex addons. It's more like the idea of more complexity is an afterthought.

I guess you put all your eggs in one basket then and hope to hell that P3D takes over, and makes it big.*If you are in it to make money that is...

Edited January 6, 201214 yr by snwboardn