Why are they avoiding the word "entertainement"

[Dr Vesuvius 22]

Another possible reason why LM want to steer clear of the entertainment market has just occurred to me. Marketing. LM may feel, rightly or wrongly, that putting a version of P3D out as an entertainment product, might weaken the brand as a serious professional product.

 

You see LM's primary focus is on the profesional market right? And in addition to the basic licensing fees, they probably also have a revenue stream from bespoke projects and specific implementations of P3D for customers, contracts for the sort of money that makes the hobby market look like spare change.

 

Now imagine you're a stuffed-shirt, soulless bureaucrat, a project manager for either a small government department or a medium-sized business. You're tasked with the project of implementing a training simulation system, something you don't know anything about because that's not your job, your job is to deliver the project on-time and under budget. You have nerdy minions assigned to you to do the "actual work" and understand things.

 

But, when the options are presented to you, you do a bit of googling and find out that one of the proposals is based on a computer program that's also sold for personal entertainment. "A game?" you cry. "We're in a serious business. We don't want to be playing computer games!" and that option gets consigned to the bin.

 

Short sighted? Maybe. But from personal experience I've seen major decisions made on equally shaky logic.

 

Put it another way... you know how prissy some simmers get when you refer to FSX or X-Plane as a game? It's like that, but at the corporate level.

 

Dr V

[BimmerCop 332]

[nudata 10]

This is the most accurate representation of the apparent LM business plan I have seen. If you do not understand it then take some business courses at a local school. Many of the comments here show a sillyness that that reflects a lack of common business practices. Kiddies that want an entertainment product, for what purpose. Take what is offered and go on with it. It has to be better than FSX in the long run. You have to really be dumb to not see that this is an opportunity for people who enjoy FSX. Take it as presented or go to back to the frozen FSX.

 

 

 

Another possible reason why LM want to steer clear of the entertainment market has just occurred to me. Marketing. LM may feel, rightly or wrongly, that putting a version of P3D out as an entertainment product, might weaken the brand as a serious professional product.

 

You see LM's primary focus is on the profesional market right? And in addition to the basic licensing fees, they probably also have a revenue stream from bespoke projects and specific implementations of P3D for customers, contracts for the sort of money that makes the hobby market look like spare change.

 

Now imagine you're a stuffed-shirt, soulless bureaucrat, a project manager for either a small government department or a medium-sized business. You're tasked with the project of implementing a training simulation system, something you don't know anything about because that's not your job, your job is to deliver the project on-time and under budget. You have nerdy minions assigned to you to do the "actual work" and understand things.

 

But, when the options are presented to you, you do a bit of googling and find out that one of the proposals is based on a computer program that's also sold for personal entertainment. "A game?" you cry. "We're in a serious business. We don't want to be playing computer games!" and that option gets consigned to the bin.

 

Short sighted? Maybe. But from personal experience I've seen major decisions made on equally shaky logic.

 

Put it another way... you know how prissy some simmers get when you refer to FSX or X-Plane as a game? It's like that, but at the corporate level.

 

Dr V

[WarpD 824]

My understanding is that's not [possible because the FAA requires the following statement from the software developer :

 

"This is to certify that <

Name of Software Company or Developer> has demonstrated that the operating system and/or functional kernel(s) <Software part number and version/revision>, is fully compatible with <Name of ATD Manufacturer, Make and Model> and can assure that the communications/transport data latency is not greater than 300 milliseconds all analog and digital input signals meet the performance criteria established for software performance by the ATD manufacturer."

 

Microsoft won't issue one for FS.

 

Also, the device must be used the supervision of an authorized instructor for any hours to count.

 

http://rgl.faa.gov/r...36?opendocument

 

Ok... ESP was used by Redbird Flight Simulations until they switched to Prepar3D. They have several FAA certified AATDs. The 300ms issue, trust me, is not part of this discussion.

[Ian McPhail 55]

ESP is the base code for both FSX and P3D. The difference is that MS has sold ESP to LM, obviously conditionally, and it is for LM to continue the development that stopped when MS closed ACES.

[High Plains Flyer 35]

MS has retained the rights to produce, develop and sell Microsoft Flight Simulator as an entertainment product. It can potentially update and sell Flight Simulator in the future. Or it can sell those rights to another developer (eg. Electronic Arts). However, the value of the entertainment product is impaired if LM is also selling it as an entertainment product.

 

 

LM is probably as close to the line as it is going to get: selling the product as an educational product, and turning a blind eye if people use it for other purposes. The only reason they probably are getting away with this is because Microsoft currently is not selling any flight simulator, and P3d really does not compete with any Microsoft product. However, if at some point in the future, Microsoft were to update the code and try to sell flight simulator again, of if Microsoft were seriously looking at selling the code, Microsoft might take a very keen interest in what LM is doing.

 

But Flight Simulator, as an entertainment product, probably does hold value for someone. Flight simulators are just about as old as personal computers and are among the earliest applications for the PC. It is hard to imagine the PC community without a major flight simulator for a long period of time. Microsoft's product, while far from perfect and still quite buggy, represents the pinnacle of flight simulator development. However, if it sits on it too long, other developers will come along with much superior products.

[Ian McPhail 55]

Alain; you are a touch sanctimonious on this subject. Interpret it how you will, but LM sells P3D into the open market under the title 'Academic' at a very competitive price - certainly with a EULA but without any form of registration check on purchasers as to whether they are genuinely 'non-entertainment' in their usage.

 

Although the degree of market penetration is not as yet known publicly, I would be confident that P3D now sits on home PCs all around the world. LM makes no attempt to restrict this occurring - there are no pre-purchase tests of bona fides.

 

This EULA debate is now pointless, unless some aggrieved party takes LM to court to test its distribution of the product. The thought of someone, who??, taking an individual to court for breaking the EULA is so remote as to be bizarre.I am sure the legal profession would salivate at defending the case. The only possible aggrieved party could be Microsoft suing LM for breach, and there is not even a whiff of that. Ms now seems to have taken itself out of the flightsim arena. So there we are - responsible for our own interpretation of the EULA or no interpretation at all.

 

The FSX community is now seeing their beloved application upgraded continuously - this is heaven on a stick. BUT for those still concerned FSX is still firmly there, so they can happily remain with that version. Over to them - and stop lecturing us.

[mgh 89]

But

Alain; you are a touch sanctimonious on this subject.

 

But perfectly correct.

[alainneedle1 97]

Ian,

 

First, let me say that I will always defend your right to express your opinion here even if I don't agree with it.

 

I have no doubt what so ever about the Academic license finding it's way to individual's home PCs, legitimately or not.

 

Of course nobody will take you to court for using P3D license in a way that does not fit the way it's written, as PMDG explained, it's about LM not giving any guaranty as to what will happen in the future with their licensing, if the EULA debate is so pointless why will a company like PMDG or Captain Sim. take the stand they did? lets forget about our own opinion and ask yourself if their lawyers are that dumb?

 

Not only that but the ramifications extend way pass the debate about P3D licensing, some 3PD are not happy about the fact that their products are used with P3D when they specifically said that they don't make addons for P3D, the answers they get is something like this.... "Hey! I paid for it so I'll do what ever I want with it"...it's like me saying.."I paid for this plane to be use on my PC but I'll look for a way to make it work on my friend's PC also".

 

Be safe flying.

[simmerhead 885]

I'm sure there are people using word processors and spreadshets for entertainment, but that wasn't their intended use. P3D is made and tailored towards professional use. If someone find entertainment in that LM aren't to blame. P3D has lost much of the gaming elements that was present in FSX, sadly, because I thought many of the missions were great fun. I really don't understand why some need to make a fuzz about this...

[vgbaron 3,724]

Of course nobody will take you to court for using P3D license in a way that does not fit the way it's written, as PMDG explained, it's about LM not giving any guaranty as to what will happen in the future with their licensing,

 

And how did that work out with Microsoft and FSX? No one know what will happen in the future so to stick one's head in the sand about something that may or may not happen just leaves one's rear end sticking in the air.

 

I say enjoy P3D for as long as LM wants to keep it available. So far, it beats whatever is second best AND it is getting new parts.

 

Vic

[alainneedle1 97]

And how did that work out with Microsoft and FSX? No one know what will happen in the future so to stick one's head in the sand about something that may or may not happen just leaves one's rear end sticking in the air.

 

I say enjoy P3D for as long as LM wants to keep it available. So far, it beats whatever is second best AND it is getting new parts.

 

Vic

 

You'r asking this question to the wrong man, you should ask the same question to PMDG and all 3PD who's advices came from their lawyers.

 

My head is not in the sand as I don't have P3D.

 

By the way, I was talking about some 3PD in my post getting their addons hacked, funny that nobody care to add to this part.

[vgbaron 3,724]

Was speaking generically Alain, not specificaly to you - apologies. Mainly referring to those whose main reason for not trying P3D is because there is no guarrantee that it will be there in the future. I'm stating that is a given for ANY product and to use it as a reason not to support something is ludicrous.

 

Vic

[alainneedle1 97]

:good: No problems Vic... :friends:

[WR269 367]

:good: No problems Vic... :friends:

Alain, pmdg and captain sim are just two developers, there are quite a few who dont have an issue having a compliant eula for p3d and i daresay the list will continue to grow, for example, the new quality wings 146 and the upcoming aerosoft airbus.

 

You seem to be very active in the P3D forums, what version of P3D are you running?