I'm using X-Plane because of the sceneries and because of the airplane add-ons, and I'm using GNU/Linux because it's free software and because the performance is better.

 

Why do you say "Linux support is dropping more and more" ? For now there's only X-Aviation where there's a support drop for GNU/Linux users: example the MU-2 was compatible but version 1.5 is only for Windows and Mac.

 

But more and more add-on developers support GNU/Linux: FlyJSim, Khamsin Studio, Dreamfoil Creations, Felis Planes, ND Art & Technology, Carenado, Aerosoft, etc...

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/417462-from-düren-to-metz-nancy-lorraine/

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/419769-777-luxembourg-ellx-to-keflavik-bikf/

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/417033-flying-the-skymaster-update/

Why do you say "Linux support is dropping more and more" ? For now there's only X-Aviation where there's a support drop for GNU/Linux users: example the MU-2 was compatible but version 1.5 is only for Windows and Mac.

 

Yeah, in fact I was mainly referring to X-Aviation, as they have very hiqh quality addons and may get very important in the future.

 

But you're right, there's still SASL.

 

Why do you say "Linux support is dropping more and more" ? For now there's only X-Aviation where there's a support drop for GNU/Linux users: example the MU-2 was compatible but version 1.5 is only for Windows and Mac.

 

Don't forget the A320neo.  As long as most of the planes were using only Planemaker there was no problem since any problem with one of their planes under Linux they could give to Laminar and hope for the best. But with plug-ins you will start to reach a point where you would have to support Linux yourself. And I think that's the real problem. Till now Linux support was no big issue since the BSD base of Mac Os X was for a large portion compatible with Linux but it could become more difficult since Mac Os X is in the process of dropping gcc/gdb and switching to clang/lldb. Then we would have three plattforms with three compilers since Windows always used Visual Studio.

Since Windows and Mac Os X are more than 90% of the X-Plane userbase it depends on the plug-in developer if they want to support Linux. If the developer in fact uses Linux to program his application, this should be no problem but otherwise there might be many developers who don't want to handle a third plattform with only a fraction of the userbase but a multitude of different versions.

Yeah, in fact I was mainly referring to X-Aviation, as they have very hiqh quality addons and may get very important in the future.

IXEG announced support for GNU/Linux and their 737 Classic project:

http://forums.xplanefreeware.net/topic/9466-b737-classic-project/page__view__findpost__p__65294

 

Also XP Jets for their 777-200ER:

http://forums.x-pilot.com/topic/549-777-200er/page-12#entry31466

 

The CRJ-200 works great with GNU/Linux (better than Windows): see the manual page 10

http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/take-command-p-68.html

 

So it really depends on the developer.

 

 

Would be nice (because otherwise we all needed to pay for a full version again.) On the other hand, there are some developers who already talk about things they need that will only be possible in X-Plane 11. So, as always many different opinions ...

 

XP11 should bring big changes so the version change will have a meaning. As you said, are you going buy it, if it will be not some kind of... revolutionary product? I don't think so!

 

Also developers need solid ground to develop their add ons (I have some personal experience on that). The XP10 run was really bumpy for developers since now. Just the latest couple of months things have settled down, and now most of the add ons are working fine!

 

So when some new features come in the next version, then developers should try to find ways to see how it will works, what I have to change etc. This is not good staff for development. Laminar so far is doing great job with the developers, even PMDG's chief said that they are very happy with their cooperation with Laminar. From my point I can say I just said an e-mail to Laminar to ask if it is possible to add a minor feature, and I had a positive answer within 2-3 hours. Great staff!

 

At the end, I think that their worst decision will be to move in couple of years in a new version. They must allow developers to publish their products with implemented all XP10 features, to show how much X-Plane can shine. Probably that way more current FSX developers will follow PMDG.  

Regarding the JS32 (and: it's 32! 32! Not 31!), just be careful to read the manual. Especially the part about joystick and axis:

 

1. When the Jetstream is loaded, you can not change your joystick axis settings.

 

2. If the "control lock" lever in the cockpit is in locked position, and you leave X-Plane, you lose your axis settings. You need to load another aircraft before leaving X-Plane, OR you may simply leave the lever in unlocked position.

 

These are no bugs, but features, to simulate the control lock of the real plane.

I couldn't remember if it was the 32 or 31 lol

 

Thanks

Does FSX has add ons on the same level with PMDG? There are many good ones but none like PMDG.

 

 

This is something that actually gets to me (not you, but fsx users)

 

It's like people think only PMDG are capable of doing what they do and this is not the case, just this year there have been major releases on par with PMDG.

 

Coolsky DC-9

Majestic Q400

A2A 172

Flight 1 King Air

Aerosoft twin otter (I don't have this but hear it very good)

 

I think the T7 is a work of art, it really feels alive but there is just so much more out there then PMDG

Yesterday I started a Dubai-Frankfurt X-Plane run in an Emirates 777 and quit out of frustration after a third of the flight. At FL380 the view in the clear Arabian skies in X-Plane is just horrible - a mushy mess. Short haul is better as long as one stays under a certain FL. However good the FF 777 is, it's the base simulator that lets it down, X-Plane was just not made for high altitude flights. Next time I try my Emirates flight it will be in the PMDG! I know I've complained about this before but I keep setting myself up for disappointment. ;-)

At FL380 the view in the clear Arabian skies in X-Plane is just horrible - a mushy mess.

 

You have 4Gb VRAM, so you can change this:

- High Resolution Earth Orbit Textures

- XPOrbit by Taburet (your favorite search engine will find it for you)

You have 4Gb VRAM, so you can change this:

- High Resolution Earth Orbit Textures

- XPOrbit by Taburet (your favorite search engine will find it for you)

I have them already thanks Max, they make the mushy mess slightly more colourful and defined but still not pleasant to behold.

 

 

IXEG announced support for GNU/Linux and their 737 Classic project:

 

That was a quote from 2010. Given the plug-in this currently relies on and the times we are in, Linux is definitely not supported right now.

FSX has gotten kinda long in the tooth, but I think the recent release of the PMDG 777 may have breathed some life back into it -- if only temporarily. 

It has been my sim again for a while, since I decided I would use it for add-ons not ready for P3D.

 

Actually, after just half an hour spent tweaking ( had to remember the few steps I had walked before, through Word Not Allowed's and NickN's guides ) I was able to get FSX running OOM and stuttering free!!! ( not that I had any OOMs before, but without some tweaks there are stutters... )

 

I do not use AI or any other sorts of traffic now in FSX. I got accustomed to it with X-Plane 10, where I also ended up shutting it all OFF.

 

This PMDG 777, but also the recently released ( even if with some minor problems... ) A2A C172, certainly were a breath of very fresh air for FSX and for me, and have made this sim again certainly worth the use / keep. When it comes to modelling an airliner, some weather effects and visuals ( specially now that FSGRW has brought to FSX the realistic bouncing we all like in X-plane... ), and even some aspects of the World like lighting depending on time of day, day of year, seasons, etc... there's still nothing as good as FSX.

 

I have now completed 10 full flights, using great RWW provided by FSGRW ( which btw can in the future also provide weather for X-Plane 10 ) three of them long hauls, in the PMDG 777, and there were no OOMs, stuttering, no problems at all! I kept changing views, opening other apps, and on two occasions even went through a system hybernation for a couple of hours, with absolutely no glitches!

 

Is FSX old? yes it is!  Is X-Plane old - yes it is... it's been here for quite a while, at least since v2... Are those 32 bit limitations a factor? Not for me guys - I use what I can, and do not intend to install each and every add-on in FSX when I know it'll eventually result in prolems, but again, that's not different from X-plane 10, where I can get into problems as well if I ask for loads of photo scenery, autogen, OSM, AI, cars on roads, highly detailled clouds, etc....

 

For me the impact of this 777 was great, not only on X-Plane, but on my simmer activity as a whole....and the A2A C172 too, and FSGRW, and ORBX FTX Global, although I am not using it ( scenery looks are not really that important for me... ) too...

After installing FSX it literally takes 5 mins to tweak - I only use the Venetubo tweak and off I go, no worries!

 

Kind regards.

So on the original topic, I think my original feelings are starting to ring true - at least for the airliner pilots among us:

 

For X-Plane only users:

Not much changes, as they are not likely to shift or revert to MSFS just to try this airplane out.

 

For dual XP and FSX users:

They will spend more time with the FSX platform these days. Perhaps a big chunk of a flight sim spending budget gets spent in MSFS rather than with X-Plane addons.

 

For FSX only users:

There's one more reason on their hard drive not to make any platform changes any time soon.

 

In Short:

Not much changes in the X-Plane community as it is, but the hill X-Plane is trying to climb in order to win over new patrons may have again grown a little bit taller.

Nicely summarized, but I want to add the impact the Saab 340 might have:

 

 

For X-Plane only users:

Not much changes, as they are not likely to shift or revert to MSFS just to try this airplane out, and the Saab 340 is one more reason to not go to MSFS any time soon. 

 

For dual XP and FSX users:

They will spend more time with the FSX platform these days. Perhaps a big chunk of a flight sim spending budget gets spent in MSFS rather than with X-Plane addons, except maybe the Saab 340.

 

For FSX only users:

There's one more reason on their hard drive not to make any platform changes any time soon, but maybe the Saab 340 will show them that serious planes are possible with XP, too.

 

In Short:

Not much changes in the X-Plane community as it is, but the hill X-Plane is trying to climb in order to win over new patrons may have again grown a little bit taller.

 

Of course my additions are based on the assumption that (1) the Saab is indeed as good as it seems to be, and (2) that FSX/P3D users can be interested in small regional propeller aircraft the same as they can be interested in heavies.