Why on earth would they, after all they are selling the product .....

Why on earth would they, after all they are selling the product .....

...for use by academic Institutions.

Ok... seriously... drop the EULA discussion. Not a single one of you is an authority on it. So zip it.

 

Get the thread back on topic.

 

Regarding 64-bit applications using 32-bit addons. Nope. 64-bit applications don't use 32-bit DLLs and such. So any gauge DLLs would have to be reworked into 64-bit DLLs. Etc... etc.

I'm so tired of reading your pathetic negative posts. Go on out of the p3d forums, go back to the FSX forums.. enjoy your instable platform.

LOL you tell him mate. He propounds the boneheaded use of DX10 which is so broken even with all the fixes that it is absolute rubbish outside of his happy little Miami bubble. So he just has to keep coming here and dissing all the P3D users who are looking for something better. I don't give any consideration to his posts or opinions on the matter any longer.

 

LOL, since you asked for it...over Orbx scenery, all slider to the right..including AI...NO CTD what so ever, now that's DX10 stable is in it. That was just for testing at the time I made these vid., it's even better now, I did ask in this forum to see a vid. with P3D in action...I'm still waiting cause I'm open and looking for something better like Kannwar said (if this is his real name ..)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_1YQq_vcE4A

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Imw9LwTOLNU

 

 

 

LOL, since you asked for it...over Orbx scenery, all slider to the right..including AI...NO CTD what so ever, now that's DX10 stable is in it. That was just for testing at the time I made these vid., it's even better now, I did ask in this forum to see a vid. with P3D in action...I'm still waiting cause I'm open and looking for something better like Kannwar said (if this is his real name ..)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_1YQq_vcE4A

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Imw9LwTOLNU

No doubt dx10 with the new fixes is awesome. But for me I do a lot of comnerical flying, thus a lot of night routes.. most fsdt, flytampa, etc airports are a big block of grey whwre the runways and taxiways are.

 

P3D doesnt offer you the "wow" in the performance department but it is much smoother and I don't have to worry about it crashing on final.

 

Basically what it is is what FSX should have been upon release. That is all I could ever ask for. I get 30fps consistently with the NGX at payware areas.

 

I am enjoying the Airbus X extended, it comes with an EULA compatible for P3D and a default installer, I believe so does the QW146 and more coming.

 

Great to see developers not having an issue releasing an EULA that is compatible for P3D.

 

+1

Regarding 64-bit applications using 32-bit addons. Nope. 64-bit applications don't use 32-bit DLLs and such. So any gauge DLLs would have to be reworked into 64-bit DLLs. Etc... etc.

 

How much effiort would it take to recompile the default Prepar3d gauges?

No doubt dx10 with the new fixes is awesome. But for me I do a lot of comnerical flying, thus a lot of night routes.. most fsdt, flytampa, etc airports are a big block of grey whwre the runways and taxiways are.

 

P3D doesnt offer you the "wow" in the performance department but it is much smoother and I don't have to worry about it crashing on final.

 

Basically what it is is what FSX should have been upon release. That is all I could ever ask for. I get 30fps consistently with the NGX at payware areas.

 

Not sure but I think Steve fixed this problems.

 

As you can see in the first vid. I pushed FSX and the plane to the max at unlimited FPS (in real life I would have lost my wings...lol) so we can see some stutterings here and there still but at normal use (speed) I get no stutterings at all (1/2 refresh rate) so it's very smooth.

 

I don't have the airport you have so I can't test it but when flying the cap. Sim 737 I don't get any crashes where I fly or on final, for me the wow factor is what I'm looking for INCLUDING smoothness.

Not so. Some 64 bit exes utilize so-called " 32 bit helper executables" which they spawn to allow interaction with 32 bit DLLS. A perfect example are video editing programs such as Adobe Premiere and Sony Vegas which as an interim step, were 64 bit, but could still access legacy 32 bit add-ins and codecs. Both NLEs are now almost 100% 64 bit.

 

The industry standard GIS program, ARCGIS takes a different tack. The main exe is 32 bit, but it spawns 64 bit background processes for intensive calculations.

 

It's not THAT big a deal. If you are sensitive to a large installed 32 bit user base, you make accommodations.

 

Ok... seriously... drop the EULA discussion. Not a single one of you is an authority on it. So zip it.

Get the thread back on topic.

Regarding 64-bit applications using 32-bit addons. Nope. 64-bit applications don't use 32-bit DLLs and such. So any gauge DLLs would have to be reworked into 64-bit DLLs. Etc... etc.

 

Back on topic ... yes and no.

 

On a Microsoft OS you can't mix 64bit and 32bit code without some 64bit wrapper around the 32bit code. jBridge comes to mind here but that is specific to VST audio plug-ins, but I'm willing to venture something similar could be adapted for FSX if it ever became a 64bit native application. The FSX version of "jBridge" would need some 3rd party developer modifications but not much (should be easy to implement) -- although jBridge is for 32bit VST plug-ins, the concept is the same of inter-process communication - similar to how FSUIPC works. Certainly not optimal, but it's a viable alternative for 3rd party developers to a have quick fix until they can convert their products over to a true native 64bit format. Big hint hint to the P3D folks here ... worth looking into.

 

I obviously have not seen the source code for FSX, I have attached a debugger to the process via Visual Studio but that doesn't give me source code ... it's useful to see what's going on, but not really a good road map. So, I can't really say how hard or easy it would be to move FSX to a 64bit native applications ... but believe it or not, older code is often easier to move from 32bit to 64bit -- but it's not as trivial as a simple recompile. Like I said before, I have tried to acquire the source code so I could see exactly what challenge I'd be up against, but it appears LM is the one and only right now.

 

Who knows, maybe by chance LM will look at this thread (ignore the EULA distractions) and re-think their V2.0 spec/goals ... I'm 95% certain a inter-process com could be created for a 64bit native FSX to support existing 32bit plug-ins/add-ons -- keeping the 3rd party support (which I think is the real reason P3D haven't moved to 64bit).

Have you seen the explanations about AIR file in P3D SDK - is it a joke or what one person can do with the Xcg/MAC in PMDG 737NGX, or how the engine characteristics are presented mostly around the paid addons or where is the reference point for W/B calculations in Level D 767 and more....nothing in my quite opinion flies, even close to the real plane...no offence - just opinion...I think that must be changed, but hopefully would not..

if Lockheed Martin think Prepar3d's future should be 64-bit then now would be a good time to make the change. There are still relatively few native P3D applications.

As the OP notes P3D development has seemingly come in baby steps (his original emphasis). I would see nothing wrong in this as the alternative to such incrementalism is a long time awaiting a big bang, paradigm change. We too could have been stuck like Duke Nukem fans awaiting seemingly forever (15years) for the breakthrough update.... or it may simply never come.

 

Even if one accepts the OPs point that these incremental improvements are but minor changes the alternative (for those with committed FSX-family libraries) was stasis. Does this community need reminding that there was no enhancement since Acceleration in 2007! Was, as finally the FSX community is evolving as per most other game communities with the shader, DX10 tweaks and the recent ground physics adaptations via FSUIPC. (Just a pity it does not use JSGME.....) This change in mindset could be as exciting as P3D's own developments though with the downside that has hit other franchises as Falcon4, or IL-2 of code base multiplication and division into different development streams. (Although arguably this is what has already happened with FSX/ESP/P3D.)

 

For sure we would all like to see an x64, DX11 FSX-class flightsim. But as a consumer I note how slowly MS has tried to move the market to x64 which tells me (a consumer not a programmer) it is no easy transition. DX11 while clearly long overdue in the great scheme of things has at least been a given goal of L-M development. Whatever the reasons for it, L-M clearly want to bring on the community of users and third-party developers with it (those that haven't have not for commercial reasons i.e. while they see P3D as a commercial opportunity are prevented from exploiting because of related parties objections: PMDG-Boeing, UTX-GIS data). Again therefore I would see an incremental P3D approach here that enables commercial and technical development to remain in-step and at the same time in the market-place as superior to a programming promise to deliver a x64 flightsim over a what, one, two, multi-year develpment programme with nothing to fly in the interim but a flaky FSX.

 

(Quite why anyone, except for trolling, inserts a stuttering video to illustrate FSX DX10 superiority is beyond me.)

 

In such a context I am a supporter of baby-steps in delivering the best of the FSX class in 1.x updates every six-eight months while awaiting a step changing to 2.x with the improvements it will bring. We all know in our hearts that compatibility can not nor, should not be maintained past a certain point. (And for those who don't then the status quo ante will suit them just fine as with previous generations of users who remained with EAW, FS2004 etc.) However, for a six year old code base that point is surely drawing nearer.

 

While in truth we would all like L-M to program/release faster, in the context of the post suggesting L-M downsizing would affect the P3D development team, I trust that managers have kept costs (i.e. programming headcount down) and profit targets realstic such that any moves would either by-pass the team or, be minimal. If incrementalism fosters low-cost development (as opposed to say Flights dramatic rise and fall) and therefore long-term commitment to development then again it is to be applauded - though clearly I have no insight to L-M's business plans. However, as the OP thought the root of all problems was "limited software engineer resources" then perhaps these observations have merit.

 

So, while a better flightsim could clearly be built to exploit modern hard/software (anyone for a Win8 touch cockpit?) and who wouldn't want that today, I am not so aggrieved it is not yet here (unless it really is X-Plane!) for at least it is acoming.....

Well put Ost, I agree, small steps with the fewest bugs is the way to go.

LOL, since you asked for it...over Orbx scenery, all slider to the right..including AI...NO CTD what so ever, now that's DX10 stable is in it. That was just for testing at the time I made these vid., it's even better now, I did ask in this forum to see a vid. with P3D in action...I'm still waiting cause I'm open and looking for something better like Kannwar said (if this is his real name ..)

 

What you consistently fail to realize is that most of us probably don't fly in this small area with these scenery packages you have limited your self to. I have tried DX10 - yes it reduces the chance of things like OOM and it makes minimizing to the desktop instant. That's pretty much all it does. I noticed no decent increase in performance and for me, the real killer is its incompatibility with a heap of airport scenery packages that cause problems such as missing textures (regardless of the time of day) and a whole heap of other visual anomalies (i.e. missing aprons) and no, that shader fix does not help in the slightest with these issues.

 

If you are happy with your DX10 setup in your small bubble of compatible addons go ahead and enjoy. Leave the P3D users to do as they choose too. Quite why you always like to come into these forums as some warrior of truth proclaiming your word as god's on the subject of the EULA is beyond me. You won't change anyone's mind mate, give it a rest.