This topic makes my brain hurt.

ecause he thinks if he whines enough on the forums, Laminar will suddenly jump up and implement every last item on his feature wish list... or something... :huh:

 

(Don't worry, it's just a bit of humor... with a pinch of truth.)

 

 

If we followed your flawed logic, crawl under a rock and do / say nothing, Xplane will always be nothing more than it already is, three steps behind the competition. When anyone suggests a much needed option / functionality, or a tweak here or there, your the first one to argue / dispute it's necessity, or even it's existence. For the life of me I can't figure out why, it makes absolutely no sense. People come here looking for help with flaws in Xplane, or it's lack of functionality, and instead of admitting it's existence or lack of, and offering help, you would rather argue with them. Why don't you just help them out with their problems. Perhaps you can't?

 

Xplane, more than ever needs outside / inside help. If you never wish for it to be a complete fully functional simulator, then by all means sit back and say nothing. Some other developer will come along and Xplane will have missed an opportunity. I want it to be more, so I'm here to let them know, same as all those before me. And if history repeats itself, nothing will happen, and Xplane will remain where it always has, falling short of potential. At least I'm trying, more than I can say for you. Doing / saying nothing, will achieve nothing, say something, hopefully some good will come.

 

Marco and Ralf both had some good suggestions today (they both spoke up), they will never get looked at, let alone implemented, their already dead, so much for having an "open" developer. It almost seems they can't accept or implement any suggestions, if it requires more than 5-6-7 people. May as well be dealing with Microsoft, I hope that's not to hard to understand. Anyone can change a light bulb in your house, we need the house rewired.

 

That's the truth, with a bit of humour, maybe no humour. ^_^

 

Glen

This topic makes my brain hurt.

 

Yea I know - its like riding a really fast Merry-Go-Round.

 

Regards

jja

I agree with Muskoka - It really bothers me that XP is between a rock and a hard place. For one thing it uses OpenGl - OK forget that - but it needs alot of outside support in order to succeed. the question to its success then is how to attain that.

 

It's really a catch 22 type situation - how do you lure people like me (I like to do scenery and repaints) into the fold? I think that part of the answer is to provide a platform that is equal or better than what we already know and use.

 

The thing is that we all (whether we admit it or not) want XP to succeed. IOW 'Build it and they will come'.

 

Regards

jja

The thing is that we all (whether we admit it or not) want XP to succeed

 

Absolutely, or at least everyone should, except those so heavily invested in P3D that their prosperity (or even survival) is at stake.

 

Kind regards,

If we followed your flawed logic, crawl under a rock and do / say nothing

 

And when did I ever imply that we should do/say nothing?

I wish Austin or Ben from LR would participate in these threads on Avsim :(

I wish Austin or Ben from LR would participate in these threads on Avsim :(

 

I hope not! They already have too much work to do to improve X-Plane without wasting time here. :smile:

I hope not! They already have too much work to do to improve X-Plane without wasting time here. :smile:

they can always browse the avsim forums on a tablet or cell phone while they go to the "little boy's room" :lol:

I'd love to know what John's computer specs are. I'm building a new computer soon (that is if the wife gives in) and would like to know how I can get my copy of FSX to "scream" along like his does.

 

P3D 2.0 sounds interesting though.

 

Yes, John's comment is so over the top else maybe he has a new definition for 'scream'.

 

P3D 2.0 needs to be turned into 64-bit native code and be optimized for multicore/multitheading, at which point John can begin developing for that platform and feel good that anything he does will be around for a long time w/ a growing audience. Heck, they have the bloomin' recipe in the original 32bit code. I think bang for buck revising P3D to be 64-bit native code, DX11 & multicore is the only real path to future proofing the platform. And for flight simulators, it's future-proofing that insures long term success. Do you want to keep investing in P3D if it doesn't move to these optimizations? Keep buying addons, only to be trounced when someone comes along and builds the engine w/ much less risk for obsolescence? At least XPlane w/ it's tiny staff has made the jump and ended memory issues for a very long time. If we can all agree that flight simmers are a niche market, you don't build something that is a flash in the pan to make money over a very short period, like typical FPS's are. You build for the long haul, for robust 3rd party development, and ongoing hardware upgrades. Games like Call Of Duty series while they have a big initial audience go off the radar quite quickly by contrast.

Yes, John's comment is so over the top else maybe he has a new definition for 'scream'.

 

P3D 2.0 needs to be turned into 64-bit native code and be optimized for multicore/multitheading, at which point John can begin developing for that platform and feel good that anything he does will be around for a long time w/ a growing audience. Heck, they have the bloomin' recipe in the original 32bit code. I think bang for buck revising P3D to be 64-bit native code, DX11 & multicore is the only real path to future proofing the platform. And for flight simulators, it's future-proofing that insures long term success. Do you want to keep investing in P3D if it doesn't move to these optimizations? Keep buying addons, only to be trounced when someone comes along and builds the engine w/ much less risk for obsolescence? At least XPlane w/ it's tiny staff has made the jump and ended memory issues for a very long time. If we can all agree that flight simmers are a niche market, you don't build something that is a flash in the pan to make money over a very short period, like typical FPS's are. You build for the long haul, for robust 3rd party development, and ongoing hardware upgrades. Games like Call Of Duty series while they have a big initial audience go off the radar quite quickly by contrast.

 

Microsoft could buy back P3D 2.0 and sell it as new simulator its would not surprise me with their tactics.

Orbx CEO most know something we do not know people like him those remind of car salesmen.

Absolutely, or at least everyone should, except those so heavily invested in P3D that their prosperity (or even survival) is at stake.

 

:clapping:

 

I hope not! They already have too much work to do to improve X-Plane without wasting time here. :smile:

 

Excuse me... Wasting time HERE?

 

:clapping:

 

Excuse me... Wasting time HERE?

 

I don't think he meant it in a literal sense or implying being at AVSIM is a waste of time.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Yes, John's comment is so over the top else maybe he has a new definition for 'scream'.

 

P3D 2.0 needs to be turned into 64-bit native code and be optimized for multicore/multitheading, at which point John can begin developing for that platform and feel good that anything he does will be around for a long time w/ a growing audience. Heck, they have the bloomin' recipe in the original 32bit code. I think bang for buck revising P3D to be 64-bit native code, DX11 & multicore is the only real path to future proofing the platform. And for flight simulators, it's future-proofing that insures long term success. Do you want to keep investing in P3D if it doesn't move to these optimizations? Keep buying addons, only to be trounced when someone comes along and builds the engine w/ much less risk for obsolescence? At least XPlane w/ it's tiny staff has made the jump and ended memory issues for a very long time. If we can all agree that flight simmers are a niche market, you don't build something that is a flash in the pan to make money over a very short period, like typical FPS's are. You build for the long haul, for robust 3rd party development, and ongoing hardware upgrades. Games like Call Of Duty series while they have a big initial audience go off the radar quite quickly by contrast.

 

And that mean that he can sale you new addons as the one you have won't work in a 64-bit platform AND that is including ALL addons from other 3PD.....so...do you see a P3D 64-bit in a near future?

 

As of DX11....(if that is the only thing improved in P3D 2.0) all your addons will work with P3D 2.0 BUT you will need a patch (I know I'm repeating myself here) for all your addons to take advantage of DX11 or buy new one built for DX11 from the start...now, assuming you can get a patch for your addons (not only from Orbx) do you think you'll get it for free, don't guess the answer, just go on Orbx's forum and ask JV wich one it is...

 

Aces with their room full of developers did not get near what you are asking P3D to do...can miracle happen...don't know, we better ask brother Bill.

 

My money is on XP-10 BUT it's like I said before XP-10 64-bit NEED to be stable PERIOD before I buy it, futher more if XP-10 become stable I know 3PD will get onboard, it's a no brainer.

Excuse me... Wasting time HERE?

 

Eheh... Sorry Tom it was ironic or better yet, poorly worded... I meant I'd prefer they to spend time improving X-Plane rather than engaging in long discussions here about subjects and requests they probably are already well aware of... That being said and in a more serious note, yes it would be nice to have their participation, every now and then.

 

Only simmers like us should have the privilege to waste time here... And that's a nice wasted time!