32 Bit FSX

 

---------------------------------------------

 

Updated,  64 BIT FSX

( same original design as the original,  but "updated" )

 

---------------------------------------

 

What one now expect a Flight Simulator to be, so what one really wants.

 

The point is,  its going to take a lot more than just converting the EXISTING design of P3D  to be a 64 bit application, to bring it up to date with current expectations of technology.

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

MS Flight went some way towards an updated design, but  .........  you all know the story there.

-

 

MS FLIGHT      ( Sorry,  could not resist !! )

 

 

During said chat he mentioned that all of the assembly code was removed from FSX and replaced by C++. So, that bit of the legacy code is not at issue any longer.

 

That indeed is good news at least on the surface. Break it down a little at a time, and eventually 64 bit will come together. 

Without the source code, FSX is a "black box". Nothing anyone can do to change how it works internally.

 

The limitation of 32-bit will become more severe in the coming years  Every add-on developer wants to stand out and use the highest resolution textures, the most detailed 3D models etc. An addon may fit in the 32-bit VAS on its own, but they will have to co-exist with other add-ons on the users' system. Eventually, we will have exhausted the sims ability to evolve through add-ons. At this point everyone will have to make a decision - "freeze FSX in time" and let their hobby stagnate, or move on to a 64-bit sim.

 

LM will inevitably release a 64-bit version of P3D at some point. The whole world is moving to 64-bit. It will be easier once the sim re-write and DX11-updates are done. The DX11-update may in itself provide some temporary relief by moving more work to the GPU, reducing the load on both the CPU and by extension, VAS usage.

I have a further question...if LM comes out with a true 64 bit environment, will I lose the use of every add-on that I presently own for FSX, including my recently purchased FSXG?  I'm thinking I will, correct?  They are all 32 bit based, and the developer of each (some no longer are out there...) will have to port each and every software application.... (for free to keep customers happy and as a loyalty prior-customer, reward-of-sorts), or at an additional cost, correct, anyone?

Umberto, I had a nice chat with Adam Zofran a few months ago while at the AVSIM Fancon. During said chat he mentioned that all of the assembly code was removed from FSX and replaced by C++. So, that bit of the legacy code is not at issue any longer.

 

Well, the presence of assembly code being an additional hurdle for a possible 64 bit port was confirmed by LM, that surely has the FSX source code:

 

Re: P3D 64 Bit ?

on: January 31, 2011, 07:36

Quote

 

Geoff,

 

We would love to have true 64bit support, but this isn't a feature we can rush. We're dealing with a massive baseline that has been in development since 1977. The first MS version was in 1982, but even that was a year before I was born. Obviously the baseline has been updated and refactored many times, but there are still snippets of assembly code and 32bit pointer math floating around in there, which adds complexity to the update process.

 

Beau

 

Prepar3D Software Engineer

Now, I can't find the original post anymore on P3D forum, this was quoted by someone else so, I'm not sure if it's considered to be an official stance or not (anymore)

 

But in any case, even if there was no assembly code anymore, funky stuff such as 32 pointer math would require a lot of rework.

I have a further question...if LM comes out with a true 64 bit environment, will I lose the use of every add-on that I presently own for FSX, including my recently purchased FSXG?  I'm thinking I will, correct?  They are all 32 bit based, and the developer of each (some no longer are out there...) will have to port each and every software application.... (for free to keep customers happy and as a loyalty prior-customer, reward-of-sorts), or at an additional cost, correct, anyone?

 

This is purely speculation on my part, but my understanding is that add-ons that only consist of "data files" such as textures, 3D models etc. should continue to work fine. Aircraft addons that rely on standard .air files for all flight modelling should also continue to operate. They don't actually execute any code on their own, they just contain data for the simulator's internal systems to interpret. As long as the folder structure and file formats stay compatible in P3D 2.0, they should work right out of the box.

 

The problem will be add-ons that rely on modules, dll's or external .exe files that actually execute code on their own. They will need to be updated. Examples are OrbX "Object/PeopleFlow", weather injectors, A2A AccuSim, Majestic Dash8, Aerosoft DHC-6 Extended etc.

And, and, they could fix the carb icing bug while on their way. Just sayin'. :Black Eye:

This. Of course they would sell it to one who bids enough, unless there are some restrictions from LM/ESP licensing scheme. But they don't have to do it cheaply. At the same time they don't have to do it, because they don't need the peanuts they could pull from it: MS has no reason to sell away its assets. And they are a company so they there is no reason to do some charity for the sake of few sim enthusiasts.

 

World is full of similar kind of software which have no more support or developement, even far more less users than FSX, is older and even the developer has went belly up, but the code is still under copyright and is propretiary code that someone has rights. Source is closed even if the economical benefits for keeping it that way are meaningless. FSX is no exception, it is like 99% of the propretiary legacy software is.

We all know that Bill Gates had a very real fondness and 'emotional interest' in the entire FS franchise over the years. It was rumored that it was his will, while still holding the reins, that got us to even FSX. I wonder if we, or all flight simulation sites, could pool our entire membership into a 'personal request' formal communication with his PR office, and request in the interests of computer flight simulation, and the love of those that have/are using his company's software product, to either convert in-house, or to sell (as a charitable vein, the source code for all prosperity).  Mr. Gates does much, and varied charitable works along with his wife, for the human good. Why can we as an organized group, also ask that he orders the release of the FSX source code, to the public domain, or for a sum of money that could even be considered as 'token'. The goodwill that this would generate, for those that would directly see a value, and for those that have nothing to do with flight simulation, but do have a rather negative opinion of MS in recent years...would be a fabulous shot-in-the-arm for Microsoft under Ballard. I wonder if AVSIM and all other sites might create a Mr. Gates, as Flight Simulation Patron petition, that in time could have a closing date for our sponsorship, and then be sent on in print, to Mr. Gates himself. This has never been executed before...and just might be a POSITIVE action towards our getting a 64 bit Microsoft Flight Simulator product....

 

Tom, what do you think of this idea? It would not cost anything to create a place upon AVSIM for the likes of we, that are serious enough to sign our names, or membership handles...and project forward-moving positive momentum.

 

The bottom line, that nobody will debate, is that we need a 64 bit FSX...and we need it now, rather than on the 'winds and promises' of a future time-line....if (without any positive action on the community's part) we even have an intelligent hope to see it.  LM has made NO 'gold plated' announcements that this product will come to fruition. Nothing of the sort....  At least, we can all think about this...and jump onboard.

This is purely speculation on my part, but my understanding is that add-ons that only consist of "data files" such as textures, 3D models etc. should continue to work fine. Aircraft addons that rely on standard .air files for all flight modelling should also continue to operate. They don't actually execute any code on their own, they just contain data for the simulator's internal systems to interpret. As long as the folder structure and file formats stay compatible in P3D 2.0, they should work right out of the box.

 

The problem will be add-ons that rely on modules, dll's or external .exe files that actually execute code on their own. They will need to be updated. Examples are OrbX "Object/PeopleFlow", weather injectors, A2A AccuSim, Majestic Dash8, Aerosoft DHC-6 Extended etc.

Thanks...question answered!

I have to ask, how do people actually know the FSX source code contains large portions in assembly, has anyone actually seen it?

I love reading hardcore "Geek" threads about FSX 

$100???  How much do you think programmers make? 

 

Even for 100K, and even with the source code, I don't think it's doable.....unless you had the original team with knowledge of source.  Even then you'll still have some big hurdles.

 

I'll gladly take the 100K and give it a try though...no guarantees. :lol:

$100???  How much do you think programmers make? 

 

Even for 100K, and even with the source code, I don't think it's doable.....unless you had the original team with knowledge of source.  Even then you'll still have some big hurdles.

 

I'll gladly take the 100K and give it a try though...no guarantees. :lol:

I'd imagine that across the globe, the ROI cumulative  would be more than a hundred thousand..... 

I'd imagine that across the globe, the ROI cumulative  would be more than a hundred thousand..... 

 

I'd gladly do it for free if you give me the license (or ownership) to sell the upgraded software.

Money would be better spent investing in something like X-Plane which is alive and well. All it actually needs is developers to jump ship. I personally think Prepar3D is not going to go anywhere considering its target audience, and many developers such as PMDG, Flight1 also don't seem to be interested.

 

Even if by some miracle FSX was made 64bit, it's still not optimised for newer systems, and is lagging several years behind in terms of modern games/simulations.

 

 

in essence, trick W7 64 bit, to 'see' FSX as a 64 bit program and RUN IT AS SUCH

 

Windows already does that - it's called thunking the code to make Win think the code is the same bit length as Windows itself.  It will not, however, change fundamental limitations in the loader and program object code.

 

DJ

Surely, everyone wants and would enjoy FSX with DX11 and 64-bit. It's what most of us are used to now and sticking with it is the most comfortable option for most.

 

But realistically, currently the future doesn't look so bright for that, and I've given hope for fsx. Surely it will do for now, with NGX and other airliners that can't be beat in xplane yet, but X-plane is already where we want fsx to be... 64-bit. X-plane has a lot higher chances to fix the little quirks in its software to make it more enjoyable and realistic (most recently irritating thing is the high-altitude earth orbit textures visibility range... Blurry mess that you can't change!) but those are lot easier to fix, and  devs are still working on it with their own sourcecode that they have developed from the ground-up. Same can't be said for FSX and its ancient code, that's locked away from flight sim enthusiasts to fix. 

 

So... While I still fly FSX for the airliners i've already bought, I don't intend to support FSX any more and have my sights in X-plane; which has the brightest future of all current sims.