Maybe PMDG's choice can solve a problem.

[LeeL 272]

I think V2 will come with a new EULA

[Kaboki 437]

 

 

I think V2 will come with a new EULA

 

I think you're right :wink:

[tkellogg 23]

I think assuming for a different EULA for Version 2.0 is wishful thinking at best. I am hopeful but I think LM has given us all they can based upon their contract with microsoft. And I've seen nothing in any forum indicating LMs desire to change that. We are just not a significant part of their customer base. We just get to share in the enjoyment of a great piece of software. Wish it were different but for now those are the facts.

[TheGrunt 44]

I think LM has given us all they can based upon their contract with microsoft.

I may be wrong and I have just forgotten, but is this part part of the contract confirmed somewhere? This contractual restriction seems to pop up in P3D and EULA discussions every now and then to me this seems just another assumption. I don't remember seeing anyone from LM confirming this and thus this may be completely false. I'm not saying there isn't a restriction, because I don't know about it and there definitely may be something which prohibits LM to compete within consumer entertainment market with ESP licensed software, but I wouldn't be surprised at alll if this is purely just a choice from the LM side and MS has nothing to say to it. After all, it is completely natural when you look at where the company's market is and I wouldn't be surprised at all that they aren't pushing it for consumers even without any contractual restrictions. I know bunch of companies who don't sell their products to consumers, only for other businesses or organizations and at most offer some very limited usage for home use at most, so what is the big deal here? Why there needs to be some contractual restriction at all? And why should it matter why it is not aimed at consumer entertainment?

 

My post is by no means directed to the quoted post in the sense, more in general to this subject that pops up every now and then.After allm this is just one example where some people in the sim community make assumptions regarding the contract without any real knowledge what is written in it and then transform those assumptions to another ones to find some imagined reasons behind the decisions of LM, MS or some other company without any actual facts. After that, some of these assumptions just become truths which are poked every now and then and many seem to hold those either as a fact or then understand them how they personally want to see them. In the end, only thing that matters is the agreement with the purchaser and copyright owner, in the case of P3D LM. What is between MS and LM, is completely between those companies. World is full of applications which are or include licensed technology and nobody seems to discuss those anywhere (unless it is perhaps a news relating to some interesting patent infringement battle between corporations etc). Why? Because it shouldn't concern the purchaser in any way. Even the position of these EULAs and enforcement of them in the court of law differs between countries, so making some generalisations and assumptions of the whole is really quite useless. But EULAs alltogether are another story...

 

My point just is that there doesn't need to be anything complicated why LM is not marketing P3D for entertainment. Or there doesn't need to be any other reason behind PMDG's reason other than the protecting their business with their professional customers and thus keeping those segments strictly separated. Companies make decisions which they think are best for them and their business whether it is a deal concerning licensing or aiming for different markets. No more, no less :lol:

[hesynergy 67]

I am not going to fight this fight...it is obvious what I and many others want...PMDG on Prepar3d......

 

Both have expressed their stances and their explanations have been exhaustively examined here and elsewhere ...if you are not absolutely convinced as to the mutual exclusion-ism of the two entities, P3d and PMDG, do your homework.

 

To get the T7 on P3d, it is going to take either a EULA BREAKING HACK, or a mutually INCLUSIVE agreement by both parties....period.

 

I hate it, but that is the state of affairs, and the current END OF STORY.

 

...sob

[tkellogg 23]

I am not certain but I believe I read a post from LM that there was a contract restriction with microsoft. I'm not gonna waste my time looking for it as this topic has been exhausted and it would take too long to find it. Without actually seeing the contract I just am assuming what has been discussed is true. But a little common sense would indicate that if they could release it for entertainment use they would have done so from the beginning.

[jimmy64 43]

So for now it's two sim's for many of us to get what we want, it is, what it is. I started this thread in an effort to find a silver lining because I'm just tired of being disappointed. Life is too short. I would like to start a new thread, perhaps in a different area, to ask members to load the T7 in FSX, along with two FSDT or similar airports (3-6 hours apart) and an REX product, then fly between them at max settings. No other products need be loaded, default textures only, no ORBX close by, no Manhattan X, and no photoscenery. If this can be done without an OOM, then I'm certainly going back to FSX for PMDG flights.  

[Parping Couplet 117]

I've thrown in the towel on P3D. It's so clear that it isn't ever going to be the solution we all hoped for, i.e. the clean up of all the FSX bugs that finally delivers the software we all thought we were buying with FSX. Well of course it will/does have the necessary refinement, but what good is it if developers are hell bent on making sure their software won't work in it.

 

PMDG is one of the main reasons I'm in this hobby. If their stuff isn't every going on P3D then I don't want to know. I have no quibble with them - they have very good reasons for their stance.

[jimmy64 43]

I've thrown in the towel on P3D. It's so clear that it isn't ever going to be the solution we all hoped for, i.e. the clean up of all the FSX bugs that finally delivers the software we all thought we were buying with FSX. Well of course it will/does have the necessary refinement, but what good is it if developers are hell bent on making sure their software won't work in it.

 

PMDG is one of the main reasons I'm in this hobby. If their stuff isn't every going on P3D then I don't want to know. I have no quibble with them - they have very good reasons for their stance.

I'm not throwing in the towel by any means, if you're in this solely for commercial flying then you may be right. There are, however, great new GA aircraft. Look at the A2A C172! I'm going to just love flying that in P3D with FTX Global and ORBX areas and airports. Throw in REX Essential and OPUS for weather and I'm not sure you can have a more complete flying experience. It would not be the same in FSX. I have never had an OOM in P3D with GA aircraft no matter what I have loaded. I also plan to use Flight 1's G1000 student trainer on a second screen with my Carenado T182T.

[Parping Couplet 117]

I'd like to run both P3D and FSX side by side for the reasons you mention, but that's likely to lead to a huge can of worms.

[hesynergy 67]

[quote name="hesynergy" post="2778048" timestamp="1378386881"

Should we start a new thead "Flying P3d & RETRO-fitting FSX to work with PMDG PRODUCTS"?

 

Topic started