far more important to me is the release date ,for me it is going to be an improvement on V1.4 and i would imagine anything else out there ,so please LM just release the bl--dy thing and let,s get on with flying in my P3d+Orbx world which is all i need !

 

 

so please LM just release the bl--dy thing

 

And what is the point of releasing the beta software? The meaning of beta is exactly what it is: testing to fix the bugs, as there are usually always bugs.

I have never understood peoples reluctance to try it because there is no "entertainment" EULA, Its not like a hoard of lawyers etc are going to descend on you because heaven forbid you are entertained by a training product.

This is worse than the "PMDG 777 release date contents" :lol:

Then I show you not only where they are developing one but asking the sim community for input on what to include in it and your response is "well, it's not out yet."

The fact is, as I said in my early post, Lockheed Martin hasn't provided a start-up screen and are not yet committed to making one as far as I am aware. A start up screen in unlikely to be in V2.0 given it's now in beta

 

As for the listed features, yes I could. Am I going to take the time to do it?

Not even one documented example?

This is silly.

 

GEX's "switcher" is just the restoring of a backup of the original files, the same thing the Orbx uninstaller does.

 

Neither is a switcher like the Orbx regions. Talk about arguing over nothing...

 

Wrong, The agreement is to replace the "core control file" which tell the sim what texture to use and where, and allow a user to restore them in a direct switch, not a uninstaller.

 

Texture are NOT "CORE CONTROL FILES", they are meant to be altered, core control files which are defined BY THE MS SDK are NOT, do you see the difference now and why the agreement?

 

JV is betting on the fact that since Aces is not in the picture anymore he can get away with modifying/nullifying the agreement to his advantage.

 

 

bonchie, on 28 Sept 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:

Then I show you not only where they are developing one but asking the sim community for input on what to include in it and your response is "well, it's not out yet."


The fact is, as I said in my early post, Lockheed Martin hasn't provided a start-up screen and are not yet committed to making one as far as I am aware. A start up screen in unlikely to be in V2.0 given it's now in beta

 

Hey Gerry - if you check out the Prepar3d forums you'll see all the requests listed by users. A lot of these requests get feedback from LM. But like any developer they wont divulge roadmaps for the products evolution. This protects them from dealing with "but you said this would be in V2" comments, and allows them to release product when they feel its ready.

 

As for a start up screen that has been agreed to be in the works in the same thread on the P3D forums -

 

Quote from WBard on September 6, 2013, 16:55
So, to make life a little easier, what all do you want to see in a flight setup screen?  The usual?  New flight/load flight, choose your aircraft, weather, location, etc?  Any other clever UI design ideas or things you all want to see in it?  I know you all have some good ideas here, please feel free to share them with us!

Wrong, The agreement is to replace the "core control file" which tell the sim what texture to use and where, and allow a user to restore them in a direct switch, not a uninstaller.

 

Texture are NOT "CORE CONTROL FILES", they are meant to be altered, core control files which are defined BY THE MS SDK are NOT, do you see the difference now and why the agreement?

 

JV is betting on the fact that since Aces is not in the picture anymore he can get away with modifying/nullifying the agreement to his advantage.

So now you are accusing Orbx of criminal activity? What's next in your crusade?

Wrong, The agreement is to replace the "core control file" which tell the sim what texture to use and where, and allow a user to restore them in a direct switch, not a uninstaller.

 

Texture are NOT "CORE CONTROL FILES", they are meant to be altered, core control files which are defined BY THE MS SDK are NOT, do you see the difference now and why the agreement?

 

JV is betting on the fact that since Aces is not in the picture anymore he can get away with modifying/nullifying the agreement to his advantage.

Hey Alain,

 

You keep saying let's keep this thread Prepar3d V2.0 focussed - so maybe you could stop continually going on and on and on and on and on about Orbx ..... feels a lot like spam emails.

 

Might be best if you just start another thread dedicated to the issue you feel exists with Orbx. Then if people are interested in your opinions on Orbx you could discuss them there.

I was told, if you apply for beta testing, they would notify you within 48 hrs that they would inform me if I was selected. But its been 4 days since I applied. So I guess I am not a Beta tester.

 

I was told, if you apply for beta testing, they would notify you within 48 hrs that they would inform me if I was selected. But its been 4 days since I applied. So I guess I am not a Beta tester.

 

How do you apply to be a beta tester?

So now you are accusing Orbx of criminal activity? What's next in your crusade?

 

Crusade? Now that I showed you that you were wrong that's the only thing you can come up with? Have I tagged you as a crusader for them because you can make a valid point sometimes? Did you read what JV posted about the agreement he has with MS? He told on himself about the switcher and the agreement, right?

 

 

 

Hey Alain,

 

You keep saying let's keep this thread Prepar3d V2.0 focussed - so maybe you could stop continually going on and on and on and on and on about Orbx ..... feels a lot like spam emails.

 

Might be best if you just start another thread dedicated to the issue you feel exists with Orbx. Then if people are interested in your opinions on Orbx you could discuss them there.

 

Look like bonchie seems to be, you did not mind him replying to me, did you? You are right though, P3D forum.

The fact is, as I said in my early post, Lockheed Martin hasn't provided a start-up screen and are not yet committed to making one as far as I am aware.

The fact is, you didn't expect me to come back with any proof that LM is listening to the requests of simmers by producing a startup screen (because the startup screen is a drum you've beat multiple times on this forum trying to prove your point). Now you are saying the fact that they are making one and asking for simmers input still means nothing (proving not one, but two things you claimed don't/wouldn't happen are happening).

 

To reasonable people without pre-conceived biases, it shows their continued desire to dialogue with the community and value them.

 

To others, its another opportunity to move the goalposts and keep the same line up. I'm sure when they release it you'll have some other complaint. Your prior posts in other topics on the startup screen constantly speculated they wouldn't produce one and had no need. Yet, they are producing one. That doesn't support your past statements.

 

A start up screen in unlikely to be in V2.0 given it's now in beta

You have no idea if thats true or not. We do know they are working on one and asking for suggestions.

 

Not even one documented example?

No. I'm not going to waste time documenting what was only one of several valid points I made while you ignore the bulk of the post because it clearly lends credence to my assertion that P3D developers do value the sim community.

 

I have a feeling your position of downing P3D at every turn and on every related topic for years has a rather simple explanation but I'm not going to start a flame war.

 

 

Look like bonchie seems to be, you did not mind him replying to me, did you?

 

Ummmm .... that's the point - he replied to you because you brought it up.

Ummmm .... that's the point - he replied to you because you brought it up.

 

Read post #304 again. Now, can we stay on P3D v 2.0?