if P3D 64-bit ever came to fruition before I shuck this mortal coil I would need to denote a 64bit version of FSUIPC as version 5 and charge again, because it would certainly be a great deal of new work..

 

Peter,

Without a 64 bit version of Fsuipc, P3D 64-bit would be of no interest to me.

 

 

As a simple analogy, we can agree that a hammer is a hammer. Is it more valuable to a carpenter than it is to, say, a homeowner?

 

But the Carpenter would probably choose the more expensive hammer and that is why you will find Hammers at different price points

 

 

Does it? I don't recall seeing any mention of it in either their forums nor in the SDK, nor do I even know if their tools support the BC6H format.
 
The only native P3D format aircraft uses bog-standard DDS/DXT5 textures.

 

Interesting, DDS/BC6H is the preferred format for HDR and DX11 ... it would seem odd that it would NOT be supported in P3DV2.

 

 

 I know that there are way more people still using FSX than P3Dv.2.

 

Just curious, how do you know this?  I've not seen any official data and the data from AVSIM has shown P3D forum top of list in terms of activity (doesn't mean sales I know) ... so I am curious how you know there are more FSX users than P3D users?  If so, exactly how many?

 

I've heard 3rd party vendors suggest similar, but I question where they get their data?  How do they know if someone purchased for P3D or FSX (many products work in both and there aren't many products aimed specifically at P3DV2 so really not enough sample count to make a judgement) ... nothing that suggests that via online store purchase.  I haven't seen any official surveys or unofficial surveys.  And what about those of us that have FSX and P3D?

 

And some 3rd party vendors view pirates as "potential" customers which I just don't understand at all, but it is what it is ... do they count, if so, how do you count them?

 

Cheers, Rob

"The only ones charging a premium are those that are quite happy to "pricegouge" the customer and I will avoid those like the plague - because they do not deserve the support of this community." 

 

 

If you can avoid purchasing those products, their pricing is not "price gouging" - which legally usually refers to essential products during an emergency. (ie food during a hurricane.)

 

In the case of entertainment software, it is very possible that the price YOU paid is PURE 100% profit to the developer - the original development costs having been recovered long before. Applying your logic, those products should now be free. 

 

(Imagine your boss deciding to not pay you for Friday work, since Mon-Thurs wages covers your expenses & thus Fri. pay would be wage gouging !!!!

 

The developers who deserve our support are simply those who use their creativity and ambition to enhance the value we receive from simming.  

 

january

Interesting, DDS/BC6H is the preferred format for HDR and DX11 ... it would seem odd that it would NOT be supported in P3DV2.

For all I know it may very well support them! I've yet to find any tools to create them though...

 

...and I have been looking!  :unsure:

 

EDIT: I have also posted this as a direct question to the P3Dv2 team in their forums.

All good arguments here, no doubt. But all I really wanted was a quality Boeing that would work seamlessly well with P3D v2. 

...and I have been looking!

 

This may help: http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsdesktop/BC6HBC7-DirectCompute-35e8884a  - it's command line but I believe the code is provided if you wanted to make your own tool and/or integrate somehow.

 

Can use VS 2010 or VS 2012.

 

How it will work in P3DV2 I have no idea, you're the master of that domain.  But BC6H and BC7 are supposed to be considerably better visual quality but do require compute shader 4.0 support (which is most DX10/DX11 GPUs)

 

 

 

Cheers, Rob.

 If gut feeling have anything to do with it, I would have to say that the initial release of P3DV2 for the average home flight simmer is a complete flop!

The pent up desire for a replacement for FSX has been building up for years and the anticipation of V2 for at least a year. This all coming to a head at the same time as the release of a new generation of hardware (i7 4770k, GTX 780)that for those who have upgraded are finally seeing a tamed FSX myself included.

The problem with P3DV2 is that it does not work well straight out of the box and after spending endless hours of building and fine tuning a system both the Hardware and software I don't as I am sure the majority of the average Home simmers don't have the patients or the fortitude to deal with the issues and research the work arounds and aquire the additional knowledge of what to avoid in P3DV2 so as to have a positive flight sim experience when, but for the odd popup here and there and no HDR or Cockpit shadows and no real waves flying low over the ocean they already have with FSX!

I know there are many prominent figures in this and other forums and those people are very very knowledgeable but the average Flight Simmer and I include myself in that lot making up the majority are more limited in what they can and have the time to accomplish.

I don't have any statistics but my gut feeling is that the majority of user who have both FSX and P3DV2 are like me; P3DV2 is on the shelf until the patch is released.

That is a far cry from the anticipation in the air on the 23rd of November 2013 and can only be described as disappointment.

All the while I am having a blast with my cutting edge hardware that runs FSX silky smooth at no less than 20FPS with any plane in any weather at any addon airport in fact even over Drzewiecki NYCX and 95% of the time it is nailed to 30fps and that is with 100% AI traffic and 20%road traffic etc.

No doubt LM will release the patch in the next few days but it better be good because if a significant number of purchasers have black screens or CTD or OOMs I would say in the current climate they will be in real trouble with the home simmers.

My gut feeling is that the majority of home simmers who have an alternative have shelved it for the time being. And I bet sales are bad since only those who don't know of the issues would be crazy enough to drop $200 on it. Potential buyers will certainly hold off for some wide spread positive feedback about the fix!

It seem to me that FSX will live another day and I really think the timing of the initial release had something to do with LM having seen FSX on well made haswell machines and thinking we need to get ahead of this.

I wish them well and I want them to succeed but this patch better make a huge difference otherwise I see trouble ahead.

And then there is the pricing of the Addons issue. If FSX runs better in my machine than P3DV2 does after the patch then I won't even bother with Picking up the NGX for P3DV2! For me its all about the NGX. Some are even saying that the NGX will be 10 FPS slower in P3DV2!
And Some are saying the OOM are going to be a much bigger problem with sophisticated addons in V2!

I hope the patch succeeds. :smile:

Seems like we as a community should wait until there is a release of some add on that is "gouging" us before we start to take shots at all the developers on the planet. There are some good points made in this thread but all you ex-plane clowns with "ESP" and "ESPN" need to zip it. This is not the good ole days when everything on the net was free. Grow up...move out of your parents house and get a life.

 

Edit: Every time I visit this forum I say a little prayer that none of the LM Officers or Board of Directors ever visits this site. They would cut our access to this great product is a mili-second.

 

 

Just curious, how do you know this?  I've not seen any official data and the data from AVSIM has shown P3D forum top of list in terms of activity (doesn't mean sales I know) ... so I am curious how you know there are more FSX users than P3D users?  If so, exactly how many?

 

There is no way of really knowing this but it's also my assumption that at this moment only a few daring simmers fly with P3D v2. The er… more regular simmers are still flying with FSX. I visit various forums and the FSX posts far outnumber the P3D posts everywhere. I also take part in a big flight simming topic on a Dutch forum where there are a few die hard simmers and although they've all heard about P3D they aren't really interested (because of the cost and various add ons not working in it).

 

The flight simming market is smaller than most people think and the amount of die hards that spend money on something that to most people is more of the same is even a lot smaller, I think. Just have a look at who is posting on this P3D forum. The list of participants isn't big: it may seem that a lost is being posted and it's an active forum but it's usually the same handful of very interested simmers that post here multiple times a day. 

 

 

I visit various forums and the FSX posts far outnumber the P3D posts everywhere. I also take part in a big flight simming topic on a Dutch forum where there are a few die hard simmers and although they've all heard about P3D they aren't really interested (because of the cost and various add ons not working in it).

 

The many P3DV2 video's I've posted on my YouTube channel have received 6X-12X more views than my FSX videos.  I also get contacted a lot by people thinking about moving to P3D and/or who already have moved and asking for help (not specifically AVSIM either).  I'm seeing a huge influx of new users and possible migration users.

 

I know the influx of users in LM's P3D forum has increased dramatically.  Take a look at your License ID -- I've actually purchased 4 licenses over time going back to v1.2 ... I can probably deduce the active user count to about 33,000-34,000 ... and with my more recent license purchases there was a fairly dramatic increase from when V2.0 was released.  I don't know the current FSX active user count (key being active) ... I've heard numbers tossed around the 60,000-65,000 range.

 

My gut feel is that there are more FSX users, but I can't honestly say I know for sure - 2:1 is my current guess.  And I'm talking "active users" not total sales.

Isn't XPX certified FAA ? 

Isn't XPX certified FAA ? 

No, the FAA doesn't certify software.  They certify basic and advanced training devices which are comprised of hardware and software. It could be FS9, FSX, XPX or P3D.  The software used is not as important to them as how the hardware interfaces with it.  That's not to say that it isn't important at all, it has to meet some basic requirements, it's just that the hardware interface is more important.  Each application and training device is evaluated individually based on the criteria established in Advisory Circular 61-136.  Here's a copy of it if anyone would like to take a look.  

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_61-136.pdf

 

Cheers,

Jeff 

. It could be FS9, FSX, XPX or P3D.

 

The FAA circular reads:

 

 

4. b. In some cases, the hardware manufacturer and the software developer do not work together in developing the ATD. Instead, the software is "licensed for use" to the ATD manufacturer and incorporated into the device. In those cases, the manufacturer must attest in writing that all hardware technical requirements (analog and digital input values) are compatible with the software used in the ATD

 

I do not believe Microsoft  "licenced for use"  for  FS9  or   FSX. 

 

The FAA circular reads:

 

 

I do not believe Microsoft  "licenced for use"  for  FS9  or   FSX. 

 

 

Gerry, that paragraph simply makes a distinction, for purposes of responsibility for compliance, between the terms of para. A in which it is assumed that the hardware manufacturer and the software developer work together in building the training device, and a case where they don't. 

 

b. In some cases, the hardware manufacturer and the software developer do not work together in developing the ATD. Instead, the software is “licensed for use” to the ATD manufacturer and incorporated into the device. In those cases, the manufacturer must attest in writing that all hardware technical requirements (analog and digital input values) are compatible with the software used in the ATD. To do so, the manufacturer should obtain a “compatibility statement” from the software developer, which may, at the FAA’s discretion, be used to satisfy this requirement.

     The following is an example compatibility statement: “This is to certify that <Name of Software Company or Developer> has demonstrated that the operating system and/or functional kernel(s) <Software part number and version/revision>, is fully compatible with <Name of ATD Manufacturer, Make and Model> and can assure that the communications/transport data latency is not greater than 300 milliseconds all analog and digital input signals meet the performance criteria established for software performance by the ATD manufacturer.”

 

As far as licensing goes, everyone who purchases the software has a "License for use."  There is no distinction made as to specific usage scenarios, i.e. personal vs commercial.  Unfortunately, I'm not privy to any agreements which may or may not have been entered into between Microsoft and the various companies/institutions that have been using those programs for training over the last several years.

 

Regards,

Jeff

 

 

The many P3DV2 video's I've posted on my YouTube channel have received 6X-12X more views than my FSX videos.

 

Hey Rob, those are great vids on your page.  How complex is your process for making them? 

Love the Lotus, btw.  :smile:

 

Cheers,

Jeff