But this matter is discussed on other forums and the sky hasn't fallen in.

 

You are trying to pry open the subject.. Don't go there. And... we are not other sites. Leave it at that.

I feel the urge to write a long Blog editorial coming on...

 

That would be good. I cannot help but agree with the comments above that their are other interests at play here. Mostly that certain parties have a vested interest in ESP / P3D from a commercial product perspective and don't wish for that market to become, shall we say, diluted by us "normal users"

 

All this nonsense about who can use P3D is doing nothing but a complete disservice to the entire flightsim community.

That would be good. I cannot help but agree with the comments above that their are other interests at play here. Mostly that certain parties have a vested interest in ESP / P3D from a commercial product perspective and don't wish for that market to become, shall we say, diluted by us "normal users"

 

All this nonsense about who can use P3D is doing nothing but a complete disservice to the entire flightsim community.

 

Let me just say that I have no commercial interests whatsoever.

Let me just say that I have no commercial interests whatsoever.

 

I find your position all the more baffling then............

I think there are two separate issues here that users seem to be blending into one issue.

 

The 1st issue is conjecture about the terms and details between Microsoft and Lockheed Martin which resulted in LM obtaining the rights to Microsoft ESP which is now Prepar3D. I think Tom has a valid argument to nip such discussions in the bud, since only a handful of people are privy to the internal discussions between two companies it really shouldn't be much of our concern.

 

The 2nd issue is the terms of the ELUA as presented to end users, this is a topic that *is* important to end users, and I think should be appropriate to discuss. Because *I* as the end user, can't just use Prepar3D like I can with FSX. There is a very big distinction between the two products. I think it's important to be transparent about what this difference means to potential users of Prepar3D, as some 3rd party addon developers, like PMDG are going out of their way to make their products incompatible with Prepar3D because the license is different.

 

I think it should be ok to inform users of what the ELUA means to them, but draw the line at how the ELUA came to be the way it is.

I think there are two separate issues here that users seem to be blending into one issue.

 

The 1st issue is conjecture about the terms and details between Microsoft and Lockheed Martin which resulted in LM obtaining the rights to Microsoft ESP which is now Prepar3D. I think Tom has a valid argument to nip such discussions in the bud, since only a handful of people are privy to the internal discussions between two companies it really shouldn't be much of our concern.

 

The 2nd issue is the terms of the ELUA as presented to end users, this is a topic that *is* important to end users, and I think should be appropriate to discuss. Because *I* as the end user, can't just use Prepar3D like I can with FSX. There is a very big distinction between the two products. I think it's important to be transparent about what this difference means to potential users of Prepar3D, as some 3rd party addon developers, like PMDG are going out of their way to make their products incompatible with Prepar3D because the license is different.

 

I think it should be ok to inform users of what the ELUA means to them, but draw the line at how the ELUA came to be the way it is.

 

Unless you consider your use of P3D like you would say, Call of Duty, then your second point is also irelevant as I dont know ANYBODY on this forum who would consider P3D or FSX a "home entertainment product". Those people are all being directed to 'Flight' and quite rightly so.

Folks, this topic has gone on long enough. Time for a lock.