Vic, just wondering, is P3D much different then FSX reguarding frame rates, scenery, platform or any thing that you could tell us?

I started another thread this morning (before reading this one through) on how this is the best year in many for FSX. FSX is an amazing program that even now pushes the envelope of what is possible with a consumer computer. Just compare it to XP10, which has the benefit of 64 bits, a never ending beta program and whatever else. FSX out of the box is still way better in my opinion, although I know they will beg to differ on that forum. Add to that all of the exciting third party development work that is going on--this year more than ever--and the future is bright indeed.

 

 

 

I think you are referring to ethical behavior, not moral as it relates to a EULA.

 

It would be immoral to pirate a piece of software. It's unethical to agree to specific terms, and then use it for something else.

 

And smart people don't listen to legal advice from people on avsim. Since there are only a few trolls on this issue, I'll leave my opinions to myself.

 

P3D is the future as its being actively supported.

Fsx will be fine plenty of add ons and planes keep me busy for years

Vic, just wondering, is P3D much different then FSX reguarding frame rates, scenery, platform or any thing that you could tell us?

Much different? No. Out of the box, it performs better than FSX on most systems but even with the fixes that LM has already incorporated, it still has some of the issues of FSX. If you have a really good FSX setup that you are happy with - no need to switch EXCEPT that P3D is under continual development. If you have a crappy FSX install you might get better results with P3D.

 

My own experience was interesting. My FSX install on a 980X at 4.43 with a GTX 480 was running perfectly but I wanted to see what P3D was all about. Got the developer version and tried it. It was so bad that I cancelled my subscription. A few months later, after reading more glowing reports from users, I decided to give it one more shot.

 

Installed it, and it was as good as my FSX - I have not looked back.

 

What was the difference between the first install and the last? First time I *ASSUMED* that since it was basically FSX, it would need all the tweaks that I've used for years so I applied them to the cfg file immediately.  Did NOT do that on the second install so, in my case, the tweaks actually hurt my performance.

 

Vic

Thanks Vic,  that answers my question. I have a good install for FSX on my old system (just bought a new system) intel quad q9450 and gtx 480 and runs FSX good with all my tweaks.  I though about installing P3D V2.0 when it becomes available on my new system. It is a intel Haswell 4770k with gtx 780.

 

 

I believe we all don't have anything to worry about as flight sims go.  Better yet, we will have more options to choose from in years to come. I would like to see how FSX operates on my new system but I have a single Samsung SSD 256GB HD and a 1T WD for storage and hate to put all my sims on that SSD HD.

The only way it's being offered to us, is in the guise of professional or academic usage.

 

Well, there's a 3rd option, which is the Developer license at 9.95$/mo. LM says that anybody can join the program, even developers just starting out without any prior experience.

 

Nowhere it says you must release something. In fact, it's exactly the opposite: the developers license is supposed to be for internal use only, if you want to sell something, you'll need a commercial license on top of that...

 

So, considering the SDK is freely available, the developer license allows you to only develop for your own internal use, and LM openly encourage anyone to start developing (= they don't care to "approve" devs, like Nintendo or Sony would do...), I'd say that nothing in that license prevents any hobbyist which is not a student or a professional, to legally use P3D, if only to play with the SDK and do his own private modifications.

 

Strictly speaking, *anything* officially documented in the SDK, can be considered "developing", even changing some parameters in your airplane.cfg or tweaking an AFCAD to change parkings, etc so, as long as you did something like this (who hasn't ?), you can technically considered to be a developer, since you used information officially disclosed in the AFCAD, to modify the product to suit your needs, and the Developers license EULA explicitly says it's for internal usage only.

 

The only real issue about the feasibility of the Developers license for hobbyist usage, is the willingness to pay the subscription...

FSX needs an emergency total update soon.  I like FSX

Good post, Virtuali

You and others have made your point countless times already. Seemingly trolling the forums to pounce on any mention of P3D with EULA arguments.

 

It doesn't matter. If P3Dv2 is as readily available as v1 is now and it's really good, then many people are going to buy it no matter what moral objections you or others personally have.

 

So it's a valid part of this discussion of the future of the hobby. It may not be your future but it will be for a ton of people if its a milestone of technology and capability.

What people do in private is their own business. What people say/proclaim/suggest in a public forum is everyone's business. If you don't want to hear about it, then don't post about it.

 

So what does P3D have to do with the future of FSX anyway? Remember now, the title of this thread is "Future of FSX".

 

 

A final word on the EULA -  do not listen to anyone on the forums who play armchair lawyers and attempt to interpret the EULA - there are only 3 groups that I can think of who have that right - MS legal staff, LM legal staff and the Court system should they be asked - anyone else is just voicing an opinion - their right but simply one person's opinion.

 

Shall I quote part of an LM interview that is posted at another site about what LM considers to be the Entertainment market?

Do you have P3D, JSkorna?

Hello all. I'm a RW pilot (1000TT, SEL, MEL, INST, COMM) but have been out of both RW and sim aviation for several years. I just passed my BFR and have checked out in 3 Archers...to be followed by a C172 and next summer a Cirrus SR20. (With a little T206 time mixed in).

 

In addition, I recently moved to Idaho and had NEVER flown in this area before. So, I dusted off my FSX, bought MSE/IDAHO (which is GREAT) and added an Archer and 172 with almost identical panels to what I am checked out in.

 

I have to say that FSX has been INVALUABLE in the process of re-familiarization with guages (especially the Garmin 430).

 

But most beneficial is the GREAT terrain in the MSE package. I've flown from Boise to McCall and Sun Valley several times in FSX and have to say that when I followed up in the real aircraft, I felt as though I had flown those routes before...because I HAVE.

 

Next mission will be to polish up my Instrument skills and procedures and will fly essentially every Approach in this area so when I take my IPC ride it should go pretty smoothly.

 

I guess my point is that I'm not so much a hobbiest or gamer but rather use FSX for the reasons cited above and it has been a GREAT help along those lines.

 

So, thanks to all at AVSIM and the 3rd party developers for keeping this software highly functional.

 

Best,

 

Jim

P3D is based on an ESP which IS FSX SP2 code base with very minor changes.

 

If P3D entertains you, then it's entertainment software - does that matter, no!

 

No one has challenged P3D's current deployment and sales strategy in court, not even Microsoft. 

 

There are dramatic changes coming to Microsoft, some early clues:

 

1.  Ballmer announces retirement

2.  Win 8.1 RTM will NOT be made available to MSDN subscribers at any cost level, yes even those like myself that pay $4295/yr for MSDN Ultimate subscription ... in other words "we don't need or want you".

 

And on the B channel:

 

1.  The likelihood of Microsoft picking FSX back up is about to as close to ZERO as you can get (financially Microsoft are not in a position to do so).

2.  The likelihood Microsoft (or anyone) will challenge P3D EULA and LM's contract with Microsoft is also about as close to ZERO as you can get (again Microsoft would not spend the money on the legal resource when they have far more important problems on a much bigger scale).

3.  The likelihood P3D V2 will be backwards compatible with FSX is about as close to ZERO as you can get.

 

FSX has some years left in it "As is" ... 5-10 is my guess (just a guess).  How P3D, XPlane, or others progress could impact the 5-10 years guess.

 

In the meantime however, I suggest you try to enjoy P3D, FSX, XPlane ... all have issues, but with time and effort all can be rewarding.

 

Rob.

KingGhidorah, on 28 Aug 2013 - 9:35 PM, said:

 

Do you have P3D, JSkorna?

No Jim has Sublogic Flight Simulator. I gave it to him on 5 1/4 disks and he eagerly accepted. He doesnt like advancement so he is thrilled with it. He gets like 450fps on his 9 year old computer! Freaking awesome.

 

3. The likelihood P3D V2 will be backwards compatible with FSX is about as close to ZERO as you can get.

 

Might be a little higher Rob. Its stated on the Orbx forum from FTX themselves that P3DV2 is backwards compatible and that LM is using orbx stuff in the dev studio for testing. They were also given a copy of FTXG and havnt heard back about problems or not being compatible.

 

Take it for what its worth.

Do you have P3D, JSkorna?

I doubt it would install on Windows 3.1. He is not into the latest and greatest