Errm , the problem is: this is not really how the development process works. Sometimes you find out that your fix for one problem has a fundamental problem, so it can't work, while you find at the same time a rather simple and e4fficient solution for another problem.

The normal development process is a bit chaotic, since you can't really know how long a certain fix might take till it is really finished! And you don't want to publish this since it would look really insane.

 

That's why i did not ask for a time frame!

But just some kind of list (open to be changed anytime) of things that are at least intended to be implemented.

But most important of all:

To communicate a bit with the public - continuously.

I know:

Laminar does not have a "public relation department" and i know and totally agree that the people involved mainly into the development process of XP should better focus on XP rather than communication - but(!):

Some official statement from time to time though - let's say twice a year or so - is something which can really be asked for i think - and it would also help a bit to let everyone know:

Hey(!) XP is being worked on - it is alive - and its "end is not near" as it sometimes seems to be the case currently - and as it was correctly desribed in #41 above.

:wink:

 

 

But just some kind of list (open to be changed anytime) of things that are at least intended to be implemented.

This kind of thing can be as problematic as not saying anything at all.  Laminar has repeatedly stated why they don't announce their intentions or their schedule.

 

 

To communicate a bit with the public - continuously.

Some official statement from time to time though - let's say twice a year or so - is something which can really be asked for i think - and it would also help a bit to let everyone know:

This blog already provides frequent updates on many things XP related and should be more than enough to fill your needs.

A good start would be a road map of future features/fixes/patches/updates under construction and so on for instance - all properly and clealy communicated from time to time - some kind of sending out a life sign ...

:smile:

 

Somewhat strange ... I don't remember people complaining about a missing roadmap about the future development (lets say next 2, 3 or 4 years) back in the days of FS8, FS9, FSX. People played with their current version of FS, simply waited what comes up with the next evolution and where satisfied with what came up - or where not satisfied, but that's a different story.

 

And ... regarding this neverending "unfnished" thingy: even FS was permanently unfinished - or why did M$ release FS9 after FS8 and FSX after FS9 when FS was "finished"? :ph34r:

The only difference between XP and FS in this regard is the period of updates.

 

And as already mentioned by others - the XP blog is much more than M$ ever did in regard of announcements.

And as already mentioned by others - the XP blog is much more than Microsoft ever did in regard of announcements.

 

I definitely agree on this one, I believe we have been kept well informed about what's coming up through Ben's blog as well as various posts from people such as Andras. I can especially recall all the blog posts appearing just before XP10 was released, describing the scenery, OSM, clouds and other things. I always like and respect companies/developers who run blogs and discuss inside stuff with their users, it not only gives you more confidence in the product and its future, but also builds up excitement and more interest. 

And ... rega to take advantage of new technologiesrding this neverending "unfnished" thingy: even FS was permanently unfinished - or why did Microsoft release FS9 after FS8 and FSX after FS9 when FS was "finished"?

The only difference between XP and FS in this regard is the period of updates.

 

I would say this answer might be oblique to the original point. FS9 followed FS8 and FSX followed FS9 to take advantage of new technologies. Each step was at the very least incrementally an "advancement" over the previous iteration.

 

X-Plane (Like AMD following behind Intel) in any normal business environment would then attempt to at least match its competition feature-wise. Or failing that, come up with some trump-card that helps it remain on an even competitive keel.

 

I don't believe BET is enough of a game-changer to be that trump card, and the fact is that years after the final end of its competitor, X-plane is still unable or uninterested to date in matching its features, even in basic things. I'm not even talking about all the great 3rd party stuff, I mean basic features, like seasons, etc.

 

That's what I mean by unfinished.

 

Things we now take for granted as basic aspects of a modern sim remain in an unknown future for XPX, and I would put forward that many of those things are what cause too many who try the sim to either leave, or remain on the fence to see if things get any better.

 

Some like me, stay, but that's because I see the potential even if I fear the sim might never reach it.

 

Meanwhile, I don't believe that P3D will be doing anything that could be even remotely mistaken for standing still.

"emotional bias" 

 

 

A phrase I use often to describe when talking to people in the industry........

 

Is X-Plane perfect?  no not by a long shot......  Again is FSX/P3D perfect......no not by a long shot...

 

The fight that persists is trying to convince developers that X-Plane is the future, it really is a robust platform to develop on....

 

I think the emotional bias hurts X-Plane more then anything else, lets face it Microsoft pioneered the niche we call flight simulation and users are committed to the origin....

 

 

I love coming here to AVSIM because I get the most intelligent discussions on the subject.  I highly respect the opinions here.  How does X-Plane break over,  ###### I know how but I am limited by time and resources....

 

 

I am working on winter and autumn as we speak.........Now what we need is a solid ATC and world traffic........Oh torque steer.....

 

After that we are good.......seems small doesn't it? It is......

 

Other problems can be worked out very easily......

 

 

Guys just my opinion on what we need, I also respect other opinions on what we need....

. I'm not even talking about all the great 3rd party stuff, I mean basic features, like seasons, etc.

 

That's what I mean by unfinished.

You forget one thing. Things like a winter scenery existed in X-Plane 9!

But they simply no longer work since the reinvented the complete basic design how the world is drawn in X-Plane 10.

That's the problem with improvements. Sometimes they will disrupt the old environment, since older elements no longer work. Things like the change to 64 bits are only one example.

 

That is the real problem that P3D faces. In fact they have several interesting ideas, but most of them would destroy the compatibility.

 

 

I am working on winter and autumn as we speak.........

Autumn as well?!! Now that has picked my morale up. Any screenshots old chap?

 

And kudos as always John for dropping by with an update. It certainly helps the community's feeling of momentum for the sim and you're one of the most, if not the most, engaging of the developers.

 

I can understand the feelings of virtually everyone in this thread; sometimes I'm more excited by this sim than (almost) any other digital entertainment I've ever had. Other times I feel like it's stagnating.

 

The good thing is we can be proactive here in attracting other users. We all know XP can look better than the competition so press those shifts + spaces and put the shots up in the screenshots forum.

Autumn as well?!! Now that has picked my morale up. Any screenshots old chap?

 

And kudos as always John for dropping by with an update. It certainly helps the community's feeling of momentum for the sim and you're one of the most, if not the most, engaging of the developers.

 

I can understand the feelings of virtually everyone in this thread; sometimes I'm more excited by this sim than (almost) any other digital entertainment I've ever had. Other times I feel like it's stagnating.

 

The good thing is we can be proactive here in attracting other users. We all know XP can look better than the competition so press those shifts + spaces and put the shots up in the screenshots forum.

I am a bit weary as a commercial developer who doesn't sell at AVSIM   I love AVSIM and I understand the rules...

 

With that said I will post a few SS in the SS forums to give you guys some insight on our work.....

 

 

I am a bit weary as a commercial developer who doesn't sell at AVSIM I love AVSIM and I understand the rules...



With that said I will post a few SS in the SS forums to give you guys some insight on our work.....

 

Or post them at X-Aviation and then one of us can link to it...

You forget one thing. Things like a winter scenery existed in X-Plane 9!

But they simply no longer work since the reinvented the complete basic design how the world is drawn in X-Plane 10.

That's the problem with improvements. Sometimes they will disrupt the old environment, since older elements no longer work. Things like the change to 64 bits are only one example.

 

That is the real problem that P3D faces. In fact they have several interesting ideas, but most of them would destroy the compatibility.

 

Nope. Didn't forget it, it just came too late for me. I purchased XP9 at Best Buy, and the experience was so horrid that I not only removed the sim from my drive, I destroyed the disks! (No, that's not a joke. I absolutely loathed it.)

 

There was not a single thing there to attract me from FSX, and then as now, it was behind in many areas despite being a "newer" sim. Even setting up the controls was a nightmare, and the interface was straight from the sixties or something.

 

XPX offered enough of interest to be attractive, but shared with XP9 too many quirks and missing features to be an instant purchase. I have said before, and repeat again that Jspahn has done more to push XPX's popularity forward where it counts commercially then the sims own parent company, which is something to consider. SkyMaxx pushed me into the final "buy" decision and is almost certainly doing a HUGE part in fueling renewed interest in the sim.

 

As for P3D they are not perfect at all. In fact they seem to have fallen pretty flat on their faces with the latest release. The difference is that I expect them to act very quickly and very aggressively to address their outstanding issues and move forwards purposefully, both now, and then up to and past the 64bit roadblock and broken compatibility. I am uncertain about applying any of those adjectives to X-plane.

 

I do admire Laminar's brilliance though. Not enough resources to build the worlds cities? Create a tech that creates them automatically! Can't add all the worlds airports? Get the users to do it for ya! Can't be bothered doing seasons? Or fix the clouds or correct the water? Pray that someday like Jspahn or Alpilotx or Beti-x shows up. Or that PMDG decides to peek in just to see what happens.....

 

Works great. As long as nobody with more "Umpphhh" is in the game. Then you either step up your game, or just drop out of the race and embrace nichedom

XPX offered enough of interest to be attractive, but shared with XP9 too many quirks and missing features to be an instant purchase. I have said before, and repeat again that Jspahn has done more to push XPX's popularity forward where it counts commercially then the sims own parent company, which is something to consider. SkyMaxx pushed me into the final "buy" decision and is almost certainly doing a HUGE part in fueling renewed interest in the sim.

I think you miss the important point in Johns statement:

"it really is a robust platform to develop on...."

 

That is simply one of the main features that X-Plane offers. It isn't obvious at a first look but it is one of the main reasons for the slow pace of Laminar. Things that happen only under the hood  But for developers these features are essential.

 

And this is quite a problem for P3D. In several cases they won't have the problem if they want to loose the compatibility to Add-ons but how many and which Add-ons will we loose with this step. This hurts the expectations of customers who only want a better FSX. As I already said. Don't overestimate the power that P3D has. They have much more in common with Laminar than with ACES. The fact that they are a part of a big company isn't really an advantage. The faster P3D moves, the more Add-ons they will loose. I think otherwise they would have tried to take the big step to 64 bits. But they can't.

 

That's the difference to Laminar. They simply said: Ok, we have to take this step. If we loose compatibility, so be it.

While features like the ATC are important features for the customers, they don't have a direct influence on most Add-ons. So they were not as important as many internal changes that gave 3rd party developers their foundation, although mist customers demanded this feature. They focused on the things that only they can change, although this gave tools like UrbanMaxx and SkyMaxx the capability to shine, since Laminar had more important things to do.

It might look like they don't do anything, but in reality 95% of the changes are invisible and only seem to influence tiny functions. But then you have the final 5% when everybody ask:

"Why didn't you do this in the first place?" And the answer is: "It wouldn't have worked". Those final 5% were only the result of the other 95%.

 

This is the reason why normal timetables or development reports to customers don't work. No one knows when an internal feature will really work and you only have to rewire the connections.

 

 

Nope. Didn't forget it, it just came too late for me. I purchased XP9 at Best Buy, and the experience was so horrid that I not only removed the sim from my drive, I destroyed the disks! (No, that's not a joke. I absolutely loathed it.)

 

Well I've said this before - I think the lousy demo policy is hurting Laminar. 10 minutes (or was it 15?) isn't enough to even work out the basic controls if you come from MSFS. It definitely isn't enough to adjust graphic settings for your rig. If there were a 45 minute demo or maybe a no-time but area-limited demo, I think more users would get a feel for what it can do.

"it really is a robust platform to develop on...."

 

Its a point, and I never doubted it for a second. Its part of the potential I've mentioned repeatedly, and was a significant background factor in my decision to finally buy in. But you can have the better mousetrap and still fail. Its marketing and perception.

 

That is simply one of the main features that X-Plane offers. It isn't obvious at a first look but it is one of the main reasons for the slow pace of Laminar. Things that happen only under the hood  But for developers these features are essential.

 

Then I see it as a disadvantage that goes back to what I said earlier about the ease of development, and P3D being the path of least resistance with the lower learning curve. (until 64bit hits)

 

And this is quite a problem for P3D. In several cases they won't have the problem if they want to loose the compatibility to Add-ons but how many and which Add-ons will we loose with this step. This hurts the expectations of customers who only want a better FSX

 

There is quite a huge thread in the P3D forum where the consensus seems to be that most would willingly give up backwards compatibility for 64bit. Maybe somebody should do a Poll!

 

As I already said. Don't overestimate the power that P3D has. They have much more in common with Laminar than with ACES. The fact that they are a part of a big company isn't really an advantage. The faster P3D moves, the more Add-ons they will loose. I think otherwise they would have tried to take the big step to 64 bits. But they can't.

 

Reading their forums and their specific answers to questions about 64bit, it seems they see no need at this time for their own purposes, and will get to it at their own pace. Looking at P3D over time, I myself think its wise never to forget that we aren't their primary targeted market, and that's another thing that nudged me towards X-plane.

 

But then you have the final 5% when everybody ask: "Why didn't you do this in the first place?" And the answer is: "It wouldn't have worked". Those final 5% were only the result of the other 95%.

 

To me that kind of makes XPX sound less like a valid Flight sim purchase and more like an investment in an ongoing trial and error science project! :lol:

 

Not sure that sparks insatiable hunger for XP11

 

Fortunately I like interesting science projects. But not slow motion ones. In time P3D might become the more interesting experiment.

Well I've said this before - I think the lousy demo policy is hurting Laminar. 10 minutes (or was it 15?) isn't enough to even work out the basic controls if you come from MSFS. It definitely isn't enough to adjust graphic settings for your rig. If there were a 45 minute demo or maybe a no-time but area-limited demo, I think more users would get a feel for what it can do.

 Agreed. I had to restart the demo over and over and over, and just when I felt I was getting a feel for it, it would end.

 

It pushed my buying decision into the "I'll think about it" zone for quite a while.

 

The good thing about the demo though is that it allows you to insert addons.