Yes maybe, as I've only heard alike from multiple persons. But probably it pops up after some minutes and hence no matter for activation only.

Whatever for me as I won't reboot, sorry.

Whatever for me as I won't reboot, sorry.

 

Sorry, I don't understand this statement. Unless you're somehow talking about a dual boot system?

 

Yes maybe, as I've only heard alike from multiple persons. But probably it pops up after some minutes and hence no matter for activation only.

 

You probably shouldn't comment on things you don't know about. Classic example here, because your statement/assumptions are dead wrong.

I've heard from multiple persons that gizmo pops up a nag screen asking for some money.

All true with this. Not against anybody, but a simple statement.-

 

I also have a triple boot PC, but use other os than Linux only for recompiling stuff. Maybe once a year to fly something special in FSX.

 

-----------------

 

So basically any developers that cannot support all OS should better not start at all! Capisce?

 

-----------------

I have to agree with this for the simple reason we have a sim developed to run in Windows, Apple and Linux (hats of to Austin and those others involved in that) so it just doesn't seem to make sense to develop something to run only in Windows for a sim that pretty well runs on anything.

 

So basically any developers that cannot support all OS should better not start at all! Capisce?

I've heard from multiple persons that gizmo pops up a nag screen asking for some money.

All true with this. Not against anybody, but a simple statement.-

 

That existed long ago and for ONE project out of MANY that utilize Gizmo. Ultimately, a FREE voucher was given to all users to get rid of such screen. Now...today...such a screen does not exist. This is a moot point.

 

So basically any developers that cannot support all OS should better not start at all! Capisce?

 

No, absolutely not.

 

 

 

I have to agree with this for the simple reason we have a sim developed to run in Windows, Apple and Linux (hats of to Austin and those others involved in that) so it just doesn't seem to make sense to develop something to run only in Windows for a sim that pretty well runs on anything.

 

You have to agree with it because if I'm not mistaken you are on Linux.

 

The simple fact is this, JasonX...

 

When you get into more complex plug-ins (Gizmo being one) the dependencies involved become very high. Things work on one platform but don't work on another. You can re-write to your hearts content or get dependencies to play in harmony, then all of a sudden things are yet again not compliant on Linux. When you are in a money making operation and paying people to work on products, from a publisher perspective AND an R&D perspective, Linux is a money losing operation. We do not make a return on it (I have sold a number of Linux products). We have consistently tracked Linux vs Windows vs Mac installs for products over the years and the Linux numbers are astonishingly low. Having talked to Laminar about this they also agree, and the only reason it is still supported today is mostly for a single person involved there these days. I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've had this discussion before.

 

Simply put, the demand for Linux is just not there...not profitably in a money making operation, anyhow....if it involves much coding. Mac and Windows? Yes. Linux? No.

 

It's not what you want to hear, but it's reality, and I have the actual stats to be very comfortable with my own statements.

 

Now, sorry for the threadjacking here, IXEG guys. Not sure how we strayed so far, but looking forward to hearing more about your great looking product!

Ok I know where we stand then thanks for nothing.

Ok I know where we stand then thanks for nothing.

 

It's nothing against you, JasonX. It's merely an explanation of why not all products are supported in Linux. Mac and Windows far outweigh the market share and you were quick to pounce on the fact that a developer should essentially be shamed for not having tri platform products. I think there's more to creating such a product than you were aware (custom plugin enabled ones, anyhow), hence the explanation. If it were really as simple as "compile and go" you'd be seeing Linux support at every angle because that would take but minutes at a time.

 

I personally love Linux, especially over Windows. That said, there are realities to this situation and we must face those first, especially in a money sensitive market!

Linux is a money losing operation.

 

I understand what you are saying, Cameron, but don't be too short sighted. Running a company also always is about image, reputation, word of mouth and the like. As you have seen at multiple/a lot/many occasions in the past months, Gizmo has taken a major image hit and no Linux support doesn't get a friendly word, too. Ultimately, a bad impression remains for some and they will be hesitant to spend 40/50/60 dollars for an add-on.

 

You'll need some major campaign to solve the public image of Gizmo as it stands now.

In regards to the DC-3 I also had to defend it versus the fear of a friend that the plane won't run because of it.

 

So. Both things (Gizmo, No Linux) add up to you loosing money. NOT only Linux itself.

This has nothing to do with being short sighted, Markus. When questions are asked reputation also goes down as being worse when they get left unanswered. The short, nitty gritty answer to why many plug-in add-ons don't/won't support Linux is strictly that, and this extends beyond Gizmo, X-Aviation, or even any future developments coming along (and I am aware of many).

 

Gizmo's image is one thing. Linux is a whole other. My primary focus in this thread is purely based on Linux and plug-in development as a whole, including the R&D. As a business you must realize that money needs to be invested where money will be recouped and further profited. It's quite simple, really!

 

As for Gizmo itself, we have taken some drastic steps behind the scenes to change things around. Things that are not yet announced but coming. The difference here is we are *listening* to our customers. We definitely care, but this does not change the reality that is Linux and it's low stream of revenue.

 

Gizmo allows for a streamlined process of coding. It does not equalize to lost revenue. Developing in C would equalize to such simply because our development times would be doubled if not tripled. Even if we took Gizmo out of the equation my and many other developers' stance would not change in terms of Linux and the return of investment it provides. If you read my LAST post, Markus, you would see my personal thoughts on Linux as a whole...I'll repeat them here: "I personally love Linux, especially over Windows. That said, there are realities to this situation and we must face those first, especially in a money sensitive market!"

 

Bottom line...we've developed Linux multiple times in the past. It's simply not a viable market. There's nothing wrong in saying it.

 

Perhaps someday this will change, and the Linux market will improve. Luckily, we have further statistics to go by other than our own (thanks to Laminar) and that "day" is not now.

 

You'll need some major campaign to solve the public image of Gizmo as it stands now.

 

As a followup to this, as much as we are working on this too, this is purely speculation on your part. Keep in mind that generally the only people who speak are those that are upset. There are many, many, many others who are happy and content as can be. It's not a moment for us to dismiss that it's in our best interest to always improve a product, but as someone who knows true reactions statistically, I'm just saying...

I'm happy if the coming changes to Gizmo will do fine to this plugin again. I can only state (and do so) that I never had an issue with it, not even the famous sound issue. On the contrary, I was one of the few donators. My trust wasn't distressed. I just named what I realize people talk about and are concerned with. If you care that's fine. :)

I'm happy if the coming changes to Gizmo will do fine to this plugin again.

 

Thanks, Markus!

 

I'm quite certain these changes will be very welcomed by everyone.

 

I can only state (and do so) that I never had an issue with it, not even the famous sound issue.

 

And to be honest, statistically not many did. Those that did, however, were very vocal about it. We've been very diligent in tracking stats as a responsible business and prioritizing what needs changing in a specific order. Sometimes it's like trying to make miracles happen. ;) Programming can be like this, but we work through it with the end goal of making everyone happy. The sound issue is basically related to plug-ins competing for slots in OpenAL and is not exclusively related to Gizmo, but because we are on so many systems it's more often associated to it...primarily when SASL has also been installed.

 

If you care that's fine. :)

 

Very much so! Always have, and always will!

@ahso, I removed your post as it contained a personal attack.

A new blog including video... 2 actually, regarding IXEG 737 hydraulics.

 

http://www.ixeg.net/blog

 

TomK

Is this going to have a proper fmc?

Is this going to have a proper fmc?

 

We are certainly not planning for anything less. In fact, we are actively working on it at the moment, along with the autopilot. It is the last complex system we have to code. It is our goal to at least match, if not exceed anything on the flight sim market currently. We are aware that users are used to a certain level of accuracy at the highest level and we will be endeavoring towards that goal. Being this is our first "go round" though, we are not sure what obstacles we may encounter, but we have put a fair amount of study into the features and have a very comprehensive list. IXEG have some very capable and professional developers and we expect good results. Having read lots of literature and white papers on FMCs thus far, there are some very "fringe situations" that we may not try to incorporate, like double-bypass lateral route planning, but we certainly expect to achieve usable hnav and vnav functionality.

 

Tom Kyler

Laminar

IXEG (double agent)