Froogle agrees XP is the future. And....

[scotchegg 4,186]

 

 

For instance there is a fix for the blurry textures at altitude:



http://isdg.com.au/scenery-add-ons/



(bottom of page)

 

Git excited then but alas, it's just slightly better textures for high orbit like shuttle territory, not really a fix for the blurries at higher plane altitudes. Shame, because the world that is rendered really looks beautiful at 30,000ft.

 

Is a fix for this going to be in 10.30?

[jcomm 5,939]

They ignore the people who say "The torque roll is too strong". Hardly anything to work with.

 

Well, actually what started Austin's interest on this subject this turn around was a very sensible email sent to him by Alec, a pilot working towards his CPL and ATPL, who is a user of both X-Plane 10 and FSX.

 

I was discussing with him being tired of experimenting with different "techniques" to overcome those unrealistic effects, and Alec decided to email himself to Austin.

 

In his email he certainly didn't include any stability derivates, rotationals or Lagrangians to explain Austin what he didn't find right. He simply described him his RL exerience on a couple of aircraft he flies for real - that simple!

 

Then, Austin decided to record a video for him, but made the video public and eventually got more feedback from Andy Goldstein, and from Alec himself... But that same type of feedback was provided to Austin in the past, including links to a few threads at  various forums, where some interesting discussions on the subject were going on, and, until now, we weren't lucky to get his attention to the problem. Let's just say that this time the claim found the right slot of time, and Austin could find some time to dedicate to it, think for a while about what these guys were saying, and decide to involve himself in the search for a solution.

 

So, Goran, we really do not always need to present Austin mathematical evidence for what we say, and believe me, I would be glad to do it, since, as a mathematician, and someone close to mathematical modelling of some rather complex systems, I would love to discuss formulas :-)

[jspahn 268]

Git excited then but alas, it's just slightly better textures for high orbit like shuttle territory, not really a fix for the blurries at higher plane altitudes. Shame, because the world that is rendered really looks beautiful at 30,000ft.

 

Is a fix for this going to be in 10.30?

Huh I need to look at this again...

[jcomm 5,939]

 

 

Git excited then but alas, it's just slightly better textures for high orbit like shuttle territory, not really a fix for the blurries at higher plane altitudes. Shame, because the world that is rendered really looks beautiful at 30,000ft.



Is a fix for this going to be in 10.30?

 

Yes, not really extraordinary, but still better than the default...

[HiFlyer 9,360]

Here's a silly question related to the original subject: given the rampant piracy out there, these developers probably lose hundreds (or more) of lost product to those who simply download their stuff for free.

 

This being the case, why the controversy over offering a freebie to somebody who is not pirating, and might actually generate some extra interest and sales?

 

It doesn't seem to make any rational sense........

 

A lot of skepticism is claimed to come from people having never heard of him....

 

Which negates nothing that I wrote above.

 

Despite evidence to the contrary, I would hate to think the community has become so insular and clannish that simply not being "One of us" is worth all of this back and forth.

 

Really?

[airlinejets 709]

 

 

I would hate to think the community has become so insular and clannish that simply not being "One of us" is worth all of this back and forth.

 

Hi Devon,

 

It wasn't really the community per say. I think many of us, including some well known developers were in agreement this was really good news.

[Murmur 3,944]

And here we go for the n-th time :wink:

 

X-Plane flight model has already demonstrated his superiority over FSX for rotary wings (helicopters, autogyros, etc.) and unconventional configurations (thrust vectored aircrafts, tilt rotos, etc.). B)

 

Yes, it has failed to demonstrate a clear superiority on fixed wing aircrafts due to several bugs and flaws that mainly have effect on fixed wing aircrafts, and one of the most important of these bugs is being taken care of by Austin.

 

Most recent (and not so recent) flight sims highly focused on flight models, use (Silent Wings, Condor Soaring) or have switched to (DCS) a flight model approach very similar to that used by X-Plane. B)

[Alan_A 1,650]

Dan makes some interesting points but I think Fred's (Dreamfoil) post deserves some attention. too.  

[HiFlyer 9,360]

Hi Devon,

 

It wasn't really the community per say. I think many of us, including some well known developers were in agreement this was really good news.

Thinking about it, I agree Michel, perhaps I used too broad a brush.

 

But I really hope Froogle's request is granted, and he can start reporting on X-Plane from a lighter and more accessible perspective. Most reviews out there seem to me to be aimed at the already converted, and tend to be as dry and dull as a tube liner technical manual.

 

I hope to see something a bit livelier and more enticing to a wider audience.

 

If X-plane is really serious about growing......

[JasonHarris 96]

Dans post does make some sense but the analogy is a little off.   FSX is not sunk yet but he is correct that the market will follow the customers.

 

    I still know of companies using DOS software vital to their business.   Why?  Because there are some old pieces of software about that are still the best at what they do in a small market.

 

    I remember what these guys were thinking when microsoft announced there was not going to be any dos support in various versions of windows.   They faced thee issue of moving to different software not because there was something better but because they might not have a machine to run it on.

 

     Now there are old OS's running in many businesses to run the old software that they dont want to replace.

 

     Our user base isnt quite the same, unless we have a dedicated machine for the task we want our day to day computing to be up to date so we will move off FSX even if there is not something we feel better but because we will lose support for it one day.

 

      The point is this. It's not the titanic, we are not going to die if we dont move off.   In real life I dont see people migrate unless they are migrating to something better and if there is nothing people feel is actually an equal or better experience then they might just not move unless they are forced to.

[wlix261 79]

 

 

Now there are old OS's running in many businesses to run the old software that they dont want to replace.

 

But I think FSX+Add-ons+FSNetworks+VA's+cockpit hardware  etc has become so complex, and win7 also so complex (precisely to become a "well-working-whole") that after some time will become like a castle built with dominoes. Move one and the whole will collapse. 

[JasonHarris 96]

But I think FSX+Add-ons+FSNetworks+VA's+cockpit hardware  etc has become so complex, and win7 also so complex (precisely to become a "well-working-whole") that after some time will become like a castle built with dominoes. Move one and the whole will collapse. 

 

   Is it really that hard?  It's basically installing your hardware, following the instructions and doing the tweaks that you are used to.

 

  I agree when it is too hard then people will move.   Thats the point, when the overall experience is worse then why hang around.

 

  Leaving early because you think there is a problem in the future doesn't necessarily do any good for you.

 

   Lets say all those guys on the titanic knew it was going to sink in five days.  In a mad panic they all run to the life boat and board the Caparthia.   You know what they will be saying for the next 4 1/2 days?   We could still be on the titanic with champagne and left before it sunk.   

 

    The rush to leave wont be there until there is a need to leave or a better all round alternative.

[wlix261 79]

 

 

Lets say all those guys on the titanic knew it was going to sink in five days.  In a mad panic they all run to the life boat and board the Caparthia.   You know what they will be saying for the next 4 1/2 days?   We could still be on the titanic with champagne and left before it sunk.   

 

I agree with the analogy, and am not in the panic mode to throw away immediately my FSX+Add-ons. Actually, I enjoy to a degree some of the reading in forums, experimenting and tweaking with FSX and add-ons, which has literally become part of the hobby (as long as there is time to fly the thing). My point is that there is an elephant in the room that the market needs to deal with, and secure support for what simmers want if a piece of the Dominoes falls back.  

[scotchegg 4,186]

But I really hope Froogle's request is granted, and he can start reporting on X-Plane from a lighter and more accessible perspective

 

Yes, happily some devs did get in touch with him and offered him stuff including "an aircraft that's in beta that I won't name until they announce the release" heh heh. That's all the threads were supposed to do really, prod any devs who perhaps missed his mails or dismissed them as spam to respond so hopefully this is an all's well that ends well situation.

[pryoski 84]

Without getting sidetracked into the merits of the idea .. and I agree there are quite a few advantages to be had, no one has acknowledged why the initial post was responded to the way it was on both the major X-Plane forums. No amount of pointing out the merits or the short-sightedness of the respondee's will mitigate why they responded in the way they did in the first place.

Truth be told, there is a fair amount of hypocrisy on both sides of the fence about how each "camp" responds to the other, and it's evident in this discussion as well.

Obviously when searching for middle ground, there should be some sensibilities to take into account ... to do and expect otherwise is just trollish and hypocritical.

I didn't respond to the initial post in a negative manner, but its human nature to dislike being told what is good for one by a stranger who just knows better. It is a knee-jerk reaction, but one that doesn't surprise me given the history ... and I point the finger at BOTH camps.

That people, is the "why" ... however, seeing the comments here, there and on the actual YouTube channel I think very few will "get" this. :lol: