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).

 

Rob.

===============================================================

 

Rob,

 

Let assume that money or legal resource is not a problem, why (for what reason) would MS or anyone think about challenging P3D's EULA?

 

 

Let assume that money or legal resource is not a problem, why (for what reason) would MS or anyone think about challenging P3D's EULA?

 

I can give you give you one! If for whatever reason, say the new CEO thinks it was a mistake to cancel the FS franchise and restarts it. They may not want the competition from what is essentially there own product. I'm sure that was the reason for the provision in the first place. To retain their rights to produce again if they wanted to. Else why would they put that limitation in the agreement. Granted it's highly unlikely in the current climate MS will go back to FS, but it is possible!!

I can give you give you one! If for whatever reason, say the new CEO thinks it was a mistake to cancel the FS franchise and restarts it. They may not want the competition from what is essentially there own product. I'm sure that was the reason for the provision in the first place. To retain their rights to produce again if they wanted to. Else why would they put that limitation in the agreement. Granted it's highly unlikely in the current climate MS will go back to FS, but it is possible!!

 

It's really not cost effective for them to even consider that. Remember the guys making decisions at MS are not sim fans. From a business perspective, it would be rediculous for them to bother LM with any of this.

I can give you give you one! If for whatever reason, say the new CEO thinks it was a mistake to cancel the FS franchise and restarts it. They may not want the competition from what is essentially there own product. I'm sure that was the reason for the provision in the first place. To retain their rights to produce again if they wanted to. Else why would they put that limitation in the agreement. Granted it's highly unlikely in the current climate MS will go back to FS, but it is possible!!

 

I don't get this, what competition?

I don't get this, what competition?

 

+1

I don't get this, what competition?

He meant the competition between P3D and a (unlikely) new MS Flight Sim, in case MS should ever get back into the FS business.

I don't get this, what competition?

P3D, which is essentially MS's ESP plus LM's mods

 

 

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

 

Jim - don't you EVER get tired of beating a dead horse? SHOULD it ever come to it, the definition that a COURT of law decides for "entertainment" is what is relevant, not mine, yours, LM interviewee or anyone else.

 

The fact is, other than a great stirring point for these forums, the involved parties obviously do not give a darn. I know of NO ONE who has been denied a license by LM - do you? When that happens you can jump up and beat your chest to your hearts content but I fear it ain't gonna happen.

 

My advice to anyone considering purchase of P3D?  Make your decision on whether or not YOU can afford it, want it, have room for it - do not make your decision yea or nay based upon anyone else's opinion.

 

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.

 

 

P3D should fly on the Haswell system. Considering that one of the strengths of 2.0 will be to offload the rendering to the GPU and that the 780 is a beast - you should be in hog heaven.

 

If you haven't seen it http://www.simforums.com/forums/haswell-48ghz-on-air-building-a-haswell-system_topic46180.html - excellent info from NickN.

 

Vic

Vic, thanks so much for that thread from NickN. It is fantastic. I may just have to install FSX also on my Haswell system! I had to bookmark that thread, great read.

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".

 

 

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

The thread had clearly become about FS going forward and not just FSX as a single program. XP is being discussed as well.

 

Maybe you should stop worrying so much about what people do in private while opining on the forum about something that doesnt even concern you. You are a broken record about P3D.

 

And if you want quotes you can find quotes from a LM developer saying if you want to buy P3D to squash virtual bugs on the taxiway then its ok.

 

It's stupid that you and a few others have more concern for the P3D Eula then LM and MS do. None of you work for them.

 

Get a new battle to fight.

P3D, which is essentially MS's ESP plus LM's mods

 

Wait a minute here....let me get this straight, P3D is NOT for entertaining purposes as LM specifically stated that,  they also stated that they will never sell P3D for entertainment, so far I think I got this right, right?

 

Knowing all that, and also knowing that as of today who ever got or use P3D are entitle to it and are not using it under false pretenses and are in complete agreement with their EULA why will MS or anyone else think about challenging P3D's EULA now or in the future? 

 

I've read that MS is making some noise about the whole thing, what (if true) would be their reason(s) to do so, am I missing something here?

 

PS: post edited to reflect "I've read" and not "I've heard".

I've heard that MS is making some noise about the whole thing, what (if true) would be their reason(s) to do so, am I missing something here?

No, you didn't hear that.

 

You have one half a quote from the Aerosoft guy months ago and since then even he has done an about face and started selling all their products with P3D installers and saying P3D is the future.

 

 

With other flight sims available, x Plane and P3D, in your opinion, what do you think will happen to FSX in the future if anything at all?

 

This is from the OP. He isn't asking about xPlane or P3D (which is based on ESP code), he is asking about the future for FSX, so any discussion about P3D's EULA is totally irrelevant!

This is from the OP. He isn't asking about xPlane or P3D (which is based on ESP code), he is asking about the future for FSX, so any discussion about P3D's EULA is totally irrelevant!

So what?

 

There's no rule that only what's asked in the OP may be discussed.

 

Other simulators are part of the discussion of what happens to FSX, how long it lives on, etc. The OP alludes to this himself.

As an exclusive gate to get driver I could easily spend the rest of my life with FSX, even fs9. My concern is OS support and possible FSX/addon compatibility issues going forward. I suppose some imaginative tweaking of future Windows OS' and FSX addons may be in order to ensure stuff still works on the comparatively static FSX base program.