Once again, thumbs up on the enthusiasm, which is very close to naivety at times. Where is that special mast and how come that, in your view, a P3D purchase helps and other sims or just sticking to the brave addon devs does not?Get those 50 Dollars to a not multi-billion company of your choice, maybe to some of those impressive one-man-shows, and you've done more for that small flight sim business than you can imagine. :(

When FSX is not being worked on, and the other options are limited, then simply staying with FSX and supporting developers who only make stuff for a sim which is the end of its particular road, is akin to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic; you can do that as much as you like, but it won't stop the ship from sinking. Getting that money to a sim which is being worked on and does have a new version coming out, is climbing off the Titanic onto a lifeboat. This is why I also bought X-Plane 10, and I haven't even installed that as yet.FSX is a long way from slipping under the waves just yet I admit, but it is inevitable. And with P3D, you can actually slip beneath the waves too, since that bit is modeled as well LOLIn addition to its commercial value for Lockheed Martin as a professional training tool, the PR value of being the guardians of flight simming with Prepar3D will not be lost on Lockheed Martin. It is small potatoes to them in monetary terms, but it can and will be seen as them reaching out to those who might then want to work for them in the future, so it puts them in a positive light in the industry. That is its value beyond merely the dollars they spend on keeping it rolling, and that is why I think they will almost certainly stick with it. I'll bet you fifty quid that both Boeing and EADS wish they'd thought of that and bought it themselves; every time you crank it up, you see LM's logo, and one day, many of the people who see that logo will be in jobs where they will be making decisions about which real aeroplanes and systems to buy.Al

I can respect your opinion, Alan. But I absolutely disagree on the statement about the small devs in the business. 50 Dollars helps them a lot, while that mainly commercial oriented LM project has a financial background of another magnitude. Not to forget other simulator engines and companies, which don't seem to be in your view but act as a true alternative, even coming with a nice feature set right out of the box.

Getting that money to a sim which is being worked on and does have a new version coming out, is climbing off the Titanic onto a lifeboat.

I like that picture. But with P3D 1.3 and the same old or slightly improved FSX/ESP engine driving it (hence the downsides mentioned), you are stepping onto just another Titanic, not having an inch more of obstacle clearance. If it helps.

the memory usage,

One of the fixes in the 1.3 update was improved memory usage.....

I like that picture. But with P3D 1.3 and the same old or slightly improved FSX/ESP engine driving it (hence the downsides mentioned), you are stepping onto just another Titanic, not having an inch more of obstacle clearance. If it helps.

The key word here is improved, or to stay with the Titanic analogy, right after that disaster, the improvement which was not long in forthcoming, was to make it a requirement to have enough lifeboats for everyone. With P3D, yes they have the ESP base code, but they are looking at the disastrous aspects of it too, and making changes.So the big deal here really is not the 3D engine itself, but the fact that they have something which already has an entire world database, the vast majority of airports and a basic structure. This is the main thing which is stopping other flight sims from potentially being created; the work involved in doing all that from scratch as opposed to having it all in place from the legacy of it being built over numerous iterations of Flight Simulator. LM can bolt that to an improved, or even completely new 3D engine any time they like, and unlike most other flight sim developers, they have the cash to make that possible and the fundamental stuff already in the bag.I'm not advocating the notion that everyone should immediately abandon FSX, rush out and buy P3D, nor that as flight simmers our troubles are over. But what I am saying is that P3D offers us a lot more hope than when MS said that there would be no more versions of Flight Simulator, and for fifty bucks, I was prepared (geddit?) to take a gamble on that being something to show some faith in. Anyone is free to disagree with that of course, or call me overly optimistic if they want to, but I thought it was worth a punt; after all, you can't even have a really good night out for fifty bucks, but you might get a lot of good nights in for having spent it.Al

Once again, a ton of enthusiasm, Alan. I'd prefer the QM2 over any improved Titanic, which is the thing I already own and keep clear of obstacles since 2006.On the money aspect, I think LM just showed some nerves by lowering the price that much. It may look like a promising offer, but it may also turn out as just another FSX for 50 bucks. I think that's my tenor. With 2.0 and a new price and package, things may look different of course.Wanna help the business? Get your money to companies where a 50 purchase counts a lot. This also enables them to plan further and look for future ways of running their small and valuable business. Again, just a suggestion.A side topic. Is that one month trial still available? I think this would help the folks a lot to determine the value of the nice change logs.

It's worth bearing in mind that I am, and always have been a strong advocate of supporting fledgling developers anyway, so my support for P3D is not some kind of mutually exclusive deal when it comes to throwing money about. I'm sure you will have noticed me advocating exactly that on the thread relating to Virtualcol's J31 the other day in this very forum, and that is by no means an isolated example of me doing that, as I'm sure my wife and bank manager will readily confirm, doubtless with a look of dismay LOL.Al

Alan, I don't question your motives. I appreciate adore your writing style, your (different) thoughts on things and your enthusiasm. While I'd say that the last item has reached a new peak (from the wording) on this topic, I mostly see it as a nice alternative to the sometimes grumpy tenor of flight sim forums in general.So I'm the grumpy part this time, but we both have made our points clear I think. And that's the spirit. :smile:Repeating that one. Does anybody know?

Is that one month trial still available? I think this would help the folks a lot to determine the value of the nice change logs.

try it and see, looks like it ran out...http://www.prepar3d.com/ComputerPilot/Al

I'll spend a lot of my $50 bills on those who develop addons for Outerra. As for P3D I'm with Alan. The P3D team are improving on a sim that MS killed off in 2009. It is the only sim with a future at the moment. X-Plane 10 and Flight are too strange for me.

It offers the chance that we may get an iteration of Flight Simulator that is DX11 capable, 64 bit capable and which uses the GPU more, which is worth 49 bucks to me, in fact more, since before that I had a monthly subscription. FSX is not going to get any faster, fancier or smoother, MS are done with it.

Venture a guess on whether or not LM would remove access at the lower cost where they to take it to DX11 & 64 bit native sim? Or is that even possible w/ the FSX core? If there is a very good assurance this is where P3D is going then I can see jumping in, however if this is more in the realm of wishful thinking I think I'll stay out for the time being.

I don't think it is wishful thinking at all to suppose that Lockheed Martin will vastly improve ESP in its Prepar3D incarnation. And here is why that is so...The fact is, Lockheed Martin did not buy ESP simply to be benevolent to flight simmers who were dismayed at MS dropping Flight Simulator, and anyone who thinks they did, is mistaken. No, they bought it to use as the basis for developing their own computer simulation training system for the things that they make, i.e. military and civilian training for warfare, rescue operations, transport scenarios etc, on land, sea, and in the air, all around the globe. Something FSX was more or less the best platform for, being already basically made, and relatively cheap to acquire. That is not the sole reason however...As we all know, they've said that others (i.e. us) can use the base software too. This was a smart move. It is a symbiotic relationship: It helps them because it of course improves their sim for use in their commercial applications of P3D since it obviously makes actually developing realistic scenery and vehicles for their commercial training sim extremely cost effective and in most cases, effectively free. The upside is that it helps us too, because we get a cool sim, and it helps FS developers, because they get a commercial outlet for their creations with potentially another market added to it. This is clearly why LM have gone that route, because all who are involved have a vested interest in making it a better platform, including Lockheed Martin's P3D team as well. What they bring to the deal, is the fact that since they do want to use it for modern training, it makes absolute sense for them to improve the way it runs, to ensure that it runs on modern, currently available hardware, and indeed on forthcoming hardware too.Naturally, it does Lockheed Martin's PR image a huge favour too, since they are perceived as being benevolent to the aviation community (which as a side benefit, indeed they are for going this route), and of course, all those involved in its simulator training, whether professionally, or as a home user of the sim, develop a positive opinion of Lockheed Martin, and its corporate identity gets a big boost among many whose interests are in aviation, and many other endeavours too. You can be sure that Lockheed Martin will be well aware of this fact. It was a very smart move on their part; evidently someone at Lockheed Martin who makes the decisions really knows their stuff. Just look at how many times Lockheed Martin has been mentioned on this post alone, let alone this and other threads, and all that publicity is costing them not one cent.Al

"Academic licensing can be purchased for educational efforts at or below the undergraduate level."What do they have against grad students? I have 4 months left and I plan to cash in on as much software I can during that period.

The "undergrad" bit is not refering to the buyer, it's refering to the educational efforts for which the software is purchased.

I don't think it is wishful thinking at all to suppose that Lockheed Martin will vastly improve ESP in its Prepar3D incarnation. And here is why that is so...The fact is, Lockheed Martin did not buy ESP simply to be benevolent to flight simmers who were dismayed at MS dropping Flight Simulator, and anyone who thinks they did, is mistaken. No, they bought it to use as the basis for developing their own computer simulation training system for the things that they make, i.e. military and civilian training for warfare, rescue operations, transport scenarios etc, on land, sea, and in the air, all around the globe. Something FSX was more or less the best platform for, being already basically made, and relatively cheap to acquire. That is not the sole reason however...As we all know, they've said that others (i.e. us) can use the base software too. This was a smart move. It is a symbiotic relationship: It helps them because it of course improves their sim for use in their commercial applications of P3D since it obviously makes actually developing realistic scenery and vehicles for their commercial training sim extremely cost effective and in most cases, effectively free. The upside is that it helps us too, because we get a cool sim, and it helps FS developers, because they get a commercial outlet for their creations with potentially another market added to it. This is clearly why LM have gone that route, because all who are involved have a vested interest in making it a better platform, including Lockheed Martin's P3D team as well. What they bring to the deal, is the fact that since they do want to use it for modern training, it makes absolute sense for them to improve the way it runs, to ensure that it runs on modern, currently available hardware, and indeed on forthcoming hardware too.Naturally, it does Lockheed Martin's PR image a huge favour too, since they are perceived as being benevolent to the aviation community (which as a side benefit, indeed they are for going this route), and of course, all those involved in its simulator training, whether professionally, or as a home user of the sim, develop a positive opinion of Lockheed Martin, and its corporate identity gets a big boost among many whose interests are in aviation, and many other endeavours too. You can be sure that Lockheed Martin will be well aware of this fact. It was a very smart move on their part; evidently someone at Lockheed Martin who makes the decisions really knows their stuff. Just look at how many times Lockheed Martin has been mentioned on this post alone, let alone this and other threads, and all that publicity is costing them not one cent.Al

I suppose that is as good an inference as any. On the other hand, it's difficult to predict just how much they can do to this core. Perhaps as you may be suggesting they knew fully what they were getting in to and could see ways to fix the inherent issues w/ the FSX graphics engine if this was truly their agenda. Another plausible reason would be that they really just want to polish it a little, not really bring it up to speed in terms of modern hardware and coding, and just let it hobble along, improved, for the PR reasons you mention. I think when there is some more empiric evidence that they truly are aimed at a real core upgrade to capabilities as you have mentioned, such as 64 bit native, DX11, etc, any serious simmer would be ready to jump on board, unless someone like Outerra starts to gain serious momentum and offers some meaningful competition. I remain very interested in seeing how it shakes out, and will hold off for now. I'm keeping my fingers crossed Outerra will gain some serious traction. That thing looks magical :()