FSX code, PMDG evolving...We need an upgrade of FSX

[fs4fun 366]

Microsoft could generate a lot of goodwill by open-sourcing FSX. If MS is not going to be in the FS market anymore, what would be the downside for them? FSX is the only thing that keeps a Windows computer in my house. My laptop runs Linux, my wife uses an Ipad and her next laptop will be a Macbook. X-Plane and FlightGear will run on Linux or Mac.

 

Come on MS, put it on CodePlex. Please.  :Praying:

[Jazz 1,045]

Microsoft could generate a lot of goodwill by open-sourcing FSX. If MS is not going to be in the FS market anymore, what would be the downside for them? FSX is the only thing that keeps a Windows computer in my house. My laptop runs Linux, my wife uses an Ipad and her next laptop will be a Macbook. X-Plane and FlightGear will run on Linux or Mac.

 

Come on MS, put it on CodePlex. Please.  :Praying:

 

You may have answered the question to yourself. 

 

If it is the reason it keeps you using a windows pc then it has value to them.

[fs4fun 366]

 

 

If it is the reason it keeps you using a windows pc then it has value to them

 

But they are not maintaining the code, so that's a depreciating value at best. By open-sourcing, the community maintains the code and the value does not depreciate.

[windshearDK 52]

Prepar3D V2 I don't know it's what 10-200 dollars per month?! That's insane... But maybe Mr. Randazzo could charm offense them into making a retail one time payment edition for us geeks...  :rolleyes:

[Guest]

 

 

They bought the code for Microsoft ESP, not FSX.  Separate products, really.  Common misconception of simmers everywhere.

 

ESP is based on FSX SP2 - Phil Taylor confirmed this.  Technically separate products, but for all intense an purposes they are the same (most likely just the DRM checking and perhaps a few other logo specific copyrighted stuff removed).

 

LM have taken FSX SP2/ESP and modified it ... what has me curious is at what point does the ESP become a significantly "different" product such that it is not bound by any contracts with Microsoft?  Once LM change enough source code is it legally bound to Microsoft any more?  No this IS NOT A EULA debate (so please please please don't bring it up or else this thread will get shutdown quickly) ... I'm just curious at what point does an application code set legally become a new and different product?

 

As far as giving away the source code (FSX SP2), seems very unlikely given they sold almost the same code to LM for an undisclosed amount.  LM wouldn't be too happy to see the source code available for free.  But it does beg the question, what if Boeing for example decided they wanted to buy ESP from Microsoft ... if Microsoft didn't sell it to Boeing, could they get into a legal battle with Boeing?

 

I would love to see an open source FSX SP2 but just not going to happen ... and if it did happen how would you keep the source code "aligned"?  Meaning, every 3rd party developer would want to change something in the source code to make their product work better ... it's already being done to a lesser degree (Orbx for example).  It would lead to an ever increasing conflict of FSX core versions and 3rd party vendor versions ... can you imagine just how much more difficult it would be for an end user to make FSX Open Source work?

 

There would need to be some type of consortium for FSX Open Source -- a group that manages changes in the product versions.  Given how 3rd party vendors of FSX are "sometimes" of the idea "my way or the highway", it would be a very difficult bunch to wrangle together in a single unified positive direction.

 

Rob.

[KriVa 307]

 

 

Prepar3D V2 I don't know it's what 10-200 dollars per month?!

Well, I don't know about V2, but the only license with a monthly fee is the DEV one. The two other options are one time fees. One for 49.95$ (Academic License), the other for 200$ (Commercial license).

Pretty good value for money, really.

[fs4fun 366]

 

 

LM wouldn't be too happy to see the source code available for free.

 

Could be, but then again they may not care. LM's customers want a professional product with professional support, they don't want a community developed open source product. There are many examples of commercial products built on open source code (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_open-source_applications).

 

 

 

There would need to be some type of consortium for FSX Open Source -- a group that manages changes in the product versions.  Given how 3rd party vendors of FSX are "sometimes" of the idea "my way or the highway", it would be a very difficult bunch to wrangle together in a single unified positive direction.

 

Yup, just like we have today with Linux. As you say, third parties are extending FSX with their own code and creating incompatibilities between addons. So we're headed in that direction regardless because the framework of FSX is not evolving to meet all the demands of developers.

[severniae 78]

Google Prepar3d V2. Your wish has come true, at least in a couple of months it will.

Not really, Prepar3d unless their licencing model has changed drastically it is a commercial only product, thus not intended to be used by the casual home simmer!

[Guest]

There are many examples of commercial products built on open source code

 

From the article you linked, I'm not seeing any example of open source applications that are similar to FSX?  Closest I see is id Software, that was just the core engine and not the most current engine.  FSX has an SDK it must support ... this SDK is KEY to it's longevity.   All of those examples listed are not close in scope to what FSX does.

 

 

 

Open Source for entertainment software is simply too "open" and commercially not viable ... I don't think many of us have the "free time" to really put that kind of effort into what amounts to nothing in return other than a pat on the back and/or thank you (and we're talking many 1000's of hours of work).

 

I like the idea of open source, it would be perfect in a world where no one had any mortgages, bills, kids going to college, and food and energy were free.  But that's not the world we currently live in ... most of us need a marketable revenue source. 

 

 

Not really, Prepar3d unless their licencing model has changed drastically it is a commercial only product, thus not intended to be used by the casual home simmer!

 

This thread will get locked quickly if you continue down this path ... maybe that's your goal, not sure, but just an FYI.

[mgh 89]

Why reinvent the wheel? there's already a long-established free, open source flight simulator. It's called Flightgear.

[severniae 78]

From the article you linked, I'm not seeing any example of open source applications that are similar to FSX?  Closest I see is id Software, that was just the core engine and not the most current engine.  FSX has an SDK it must support ... this SDK is KEY to it's longevity.   All of those examples listed are not close in scope to what FSX does.

 

OpenSourceExamples.jpg

 

Open Source for entertainment software is simply too "open" and commercially not viable ... I don't think many of us have the "free time" to really put that kind of effort into what amounts to nothing in return other than a pat on the back and/or thank you (and we're talking many 1000's of hours of work).

 

I like the idea of open source, it would be perfect in a world where no one had any mortgages, bills, kids going to college, and food and energy were free.  But that's not the world we currently live in ... most of us need a marketable revenue source. 

 

This thread will get locked quickly if you continue down this path ... maybe that's your goal, not sure, but just an FYI.

No intent at all, just making a pertinent point. At present P3D isn't an option, so something that improves our FSX is the only way forward at the moment.

[AVSIM Admin 4]

This is an automatic message.

 

This topic has been moved from "PMDG 777" to "Hangar Chat". This move has been done for a number of possible reasons.

• The most likely reason is that the post was off topic.
• The topic could also have contained images or a video that were not appropriate to the original forum it was posted in.
• The images might not have been "illustrative" or "explanatory" in nature.
• The topic could have been moved because we deemed it to be more appropriately placed elsewhere.

Please ensure that your posts are "on topic" and contain illustrative images or videos as appropriate. Do not post videos or images just for entertainment purposes anywhere but in the screen shot or video forums. See our image posting rules here.

 

Members who continue to post off topic posts can be denied entry to specific forums in order to reduce and remove the practice. Your cooperation is appreciated.

[Guest]

 

 

At present P3D isn't an option

 

For you.  Others will view this differently and until it's challenged in court, it will remain open to end user interpretation and it's been interpreted a lot already.  Not trying to sway you away from the "E" word, but if it consumes this thread it will most likely end the discussion about open source FSX.

 

Like I said, I would love to see FSX SP2 source code ... maybe a few dedicated individuals could move it to 64bit and do whatever else is needed to clean up the product, I'd love to see that happen, but realistically don't think it would ever happen.  But I'm NOT trying to discourage it at all.

[EngineRoom 205]

 

 

I'd love to see that happen, but realistically don't think it would ever happen.

 

I agree I can't see it happening. You;'re absolutely right when you say an open source FSX would fairly rapidly end up in a real mess of different versions with little coordination or cooperation from various groups.

 

Interestingly enough there are a couple of precedents in the flight sim world:

 

Way back about ten years ago a little known developer called Shockwave acquired the source code for "Battle of Britain" from Rowan Software (released in 1998), and developed Battle of Britain 2: Wings of Victory from it. A couple of years after release Shockwave released the source code to a small community development group called BDG who took on development of new patches and updates for the sim. It actually worked very well and the BDG group made some really great enhancements to the sim and it still stands up today as probably the most historically accurate WW2 sim. "Shockwave" later changed their name to "A2A"....

 

Not long after the release of Falcon 4, Hasbro - the new owners of Microprose - ditched the sim and closed the development studio. Some time after this the source code for the sim was leaked to the community and various groups picked it up to continue development. Over the years those groups went in different directions and there was actually quite a bit of conflict between the various groups (not to mention the legal ramifications of using illegally leaked source code which was at the time legally told to Lead Pursuit to develop Falcon 4: Allied Force). Various different versions of Falcon were released by the different groups, and all had various improvements in different areas, but no version had them all. That development still carries on today with the only development group still working - Bench Mark Simulations.

[mgh 89]

 

 

I'd love to see that happen, but realistically don't think it would ever happen.

 

I agree. I imagine the Lockheed Martin agreement has a term covering exclusivity.

 

If I were Lockheed Martin, I wouldn't pay good money to licence ESP if Microsoft retained the right to give its, or even FSX's, source code away for nothing.