Nathan:  no problem, de nada etc....

 

I was just checking so thank you.

 

 

And for the moralists, some who have purchased at full price the PMDG 777 and NGX, have discovered modified .dll files that bypass the refusal to install into P3D.

 

They are in clear breach of the EULA under which the product was sold to them, but yes if they paid for the software i also think that it's morally ambiguous to install in P3D despite the legal implications.

 

 

 

so PMDG it is all a matter of market response.

 

I think for PMDG it's actually a legal matter, they don't want the legal implications of selling entertainment software into professional simulator.

 

PMDG have said that they won't work on 'nudge-nudge-wink-wink'; to be honest i also wish it was different.  P3D is looking like the best of the current simulators.

Thanks Wotan for your thoughtful response:

 

But I still classify it as a POQ answer!

 

 

POQ answer!

 

"POQ"???  Never heard of that abbreviation? 

Think on it, even an Englishman should work it out! :rolleyes:

 

 

I was talking more about the VA's aspect of his comment, but if you are correct, I don't see how those are "asinine" metrics? 

 

They're asinine because they're incredibly random, and honestly poorly thought through.  The landing light call is at the call of the airline SOP, and the PIC.  If I want them off earlier, I want them off earlier.  If I want them on to FL180, that's my call, and there are several good reasons for that call, depending on airspace congestion and weather conditions...but no...some random developer who probably hasn't flown a real plane in his life says "that's not right," so we have all these simmers who believe the 10,000 thing with landing lights is akin to an FAR.  I'm not joking.  I sat in a full cockpit simulator and got in an argument with the "captain" of the flight because he said it was an FAR to turn on landings lights at 10,000.

 

Guess who had a free round of drinks later?

 

Moreover, the landing rate thing is also incredibly misleading, and honestly, stupid.  Many VAs have this crap on their front pages as some mark of airman skill, and it's not at all.  Greasing landings has its place, but I'd prefer to see a board of pilots planting it down in tough weather, when that's what the situation calls for.  Go ask a real pilot what his or her best landing rate was.  I'm betting an aforementioned round of drinks you'll get a blank stare that suggests they know that you spend too much time around flight simulators, instead of a "oh hey, let me talk shop with a fellow pilot!!!"

 

 

 

He's generally pretty knowledgable and sometimes even helpful, but regarding this i think he is eminently ignorable. 

 

Sure.  When the EULAs (and the fact that there's an actual restriction on using the 777 in P3D) prove your opinion correct, then I'll concede.  Until then, you're welcome to ignore me, and ignore the issue that's right in front of everyone's face, but facts are facts.  Ignoring facts places people squarely in the same category who reject global warming and the earth being round.  These people reject facts because they don't like them.

 

...all while the rest of the world is laughing at them.

 

I'm gonna wrap it up here so I can give myself a break from this thread, giving my diaphragm a break in the process.

 

Thanks for the ab workout, though, you guys.  Killer...

Not another EULA war  :rolleyes:

 

Still waiting for some kind of firm statement from PMDG.  Has there been any progress at all?  

Think on it, even an Englishman should work it out! :rolleyes:

 

Google suggests it's p**s off quick??  In which case, i guess it was, i thought Kyle might visit. 

 

 

 

I'm gonna wrap it up here so I can give myself a break from this thread, giving my diaphragm a break in the process.

 

Hello Kyle, nice to see you back in the thread, you've been away for almost a month.  I thought you had given up.

 

 

 

They're asinine because they're incredibly random, and honestly poorly thought through.

I happen to agree with you to an extent, but i don't think it makes it more like a game which was your original argument; or at least anymore so than nice looking airports, or Orbx scenery.

 

 

 

When the EULAs (and the fact that there's an actual restriction on using the 777 in P3D) prove your opinion correct, then I'll concede.  Until then, you're welcome to ignore me, and ignore the issue that's right in front of everyone's face, but facts are facts.  Ignoring facts places people squarely in the same category who reject global warming and the earth being round.  These people reject facts because they don't like them.

I am not sure what you are disagreeing with here.  I completely agree that the 777 is not allowed in P3D, it's very clear.  The original discussion was around the use of the professional license and the use of the word "Simulator", in the allowed uses list.

 

 

I happen to agree with you to an extent, but i don't think it makes it more like a game which was your original argument; or at least anymore so than nice looking airports, or Orbx scenery.

 

Adding fake metrics makes it a game.  GTA could be a driving simulation, to a certain degree.  Add in fake money and a random metric of a level of being "wanted," and you have a game.  That's the angle I was taking.

 

Trying to recreate airports and scenery to match the real world falls directly in line with simulation.

 

 

 

I am not sure what you are disagreeing with here.  I completely agree that the 777 is not allowed in P3D, it's very clear.  The original discussion was around the use of the professional license and the use of the word "Simulator", in the allowed uses list.

 

You said I was ignorable.  My main point was about the licensing issues, so I addressed that point being ignorable, instead of my addressing my asides.  While I appreciate that there is some vaguery in how the information is presented, I really, honestly, don't believe most people would fit into that category as I - personally - see it as intended: simulating real world flying, for learning or betterment.

 

In the end, I boil it down to this:

Did you (referring to those using the forums here) have Microsoft ESP (or even know what it was) prior to Microsoft killing FSX?

Yes - valid user

No - probably not a valid user

Kyle, no one is ignoring facts.

 

The real fact is, PMDG has not provided any information regarding the licenses, cost and or release date of a P3D line, the only FACT that has been stated this far is that they are working on an agreement with Lockheed Martin.

 

What we are choosing to ignore is your so called facts that you posted some time ago, with no real base line evidence or no real relationship with PMDG or Boeing or Lokheed Martin, and therefore your comments and or statements about a cost and licene options are moot.

 

Until such time as PMDG make an announcement on the above, there are no facts to ignore.

 

Regards

Kirk

Kyle:  it is not possible to do a pyschological profile of you from your photograph.  You are probably clean, nice to your mother, and pleasant to all around you.

 

But any narrow fundamentalism and 'unarguable' positions are frightening to me.

 

Maybe it is me that needs the profile, because I react badly to people who claim the ability to interpret legally and easily matters that I am sure would be argued at length in a civil court.

 

How for instance would it interpret my use of P3D as a 2000hr private pilot with a Class One Instrument Rating?

 

LM or MS are unlikely to sue me for wrongful use, and I suspect they are not bothered.

 

Possibly, an add-on maker might take a test case against LM to court over the EULA, but most are small scale operations with little financial flexibility beyond production costs and salaries.  And anyway why throw a market away?

 

I assume MS is unlikely to sue LM for a breach of agreement, maybe they will but it is a strange way to do business with a product from which they have divested themselves.

 

Maybe the new owners of the entertainment version Flight might do so, but there appears to be little direct conflict between the products - except for the allegation that LM has sidled into the entertainment arena outside of its own EULA.  But an XBox game as opposed to a full scale large computer, huge files, massive scenery demands separates the potential audiences.  My grandsons have 'learned' to fly on my simulator, but never would they confuse it with their shoot it down gamers experience on other devices.

 

To me, however this is the only comprehensible source of real legal action, two competitors with different and partial rights to the same base product.

 

Boeing or Airbus or another manufacturer might be sufficiently offended to take legal action, but think on that too.  There are dozens and dozens of freeware and payware versions of their aircraft, so who to sue?  And how an earth could a simulation with a, let's face it, a globally small market be construed as harming the image of their aircraft or their sales.  Sure they may have given those who didn't negotiate hard, restricted license to use their data, but other add-on makers are obviously not so constrained - or have used publicly available performance data. Not so good, but still some darn good models.   Go try Google, and see just how much detail is at hand.

To side slightly with Kyle here...

 

 

 

What we are choosing to ignore is your so called facts that you posted some time ago, with no real base line evidence or no real relationship with PMDG or Boeing or Lokheed Martin, and therefore your comments and or statements about a cost and licene options are moot

 

Nobody currently speaking in this thread has that relationship, you don't speak for either LM or PMDG, neither do I, Kyle is entitled to his opinion, as are you.  Kyle gets attacked because he has a different opinion to the majority of P3D using simmers, i respect what he is saying, though i disagree with aspects of it.

 

 

 

LM or MS are unlikely to sue me for wrongful use, and I suspect they are not bothered.

 

You are completely correct, LM need this community and have embraced it.  I think that it's axiomatically correct that should the interests of this community diverge from the interest of there corporate customers it is entirely obvious which group LM would support.

 

Also addon developers are somewhat fickle regarding LM, people did have the NGX working in P3D, PMDG could have left this alone simply stating that they don't support it and if it doesn't work tough.  Instead they decided to actively block the 777 from installing into P3D.  

My concern is the contrast this has created in the community (while not entirely true) European developers have either fully embraced P3D (Aerosoft, Majestic etc...) or work on a don't ask don't tell basis.  American developers are much more reluctant, maybe because the culture is far more litigious.  It could also be that the American developers have seen an opportunity for further profit by charging more for a "professional product".

The concern would be that the first time any developer is sued or questioned the entire addon market vanishes.

Man, I'm glad I decided to not post in this topic any longer quite some time ago... Seems like the trend to slide downhill hasn't exactly stopped.

Ditto KriVa, I am out as well.

 

I have made a small protest against a fundamentalist argument, that is short on  empirical evidence but long on opinion - and is replete with intimations of severe punishment in this life and the next..

 

i will now wait for another forum to mention that the P3D version is released.

 

To all on this forum, I wish you and your ulcers well.

Man, I'm glad I decided to not post in this topic any longer quite some time ago... Seems like the trend to slide downhill hasn't exactly stopped.

 

Well thank you for that reasoned and insightful comment, not sure how we managed to cope without your participation, very glad you relented and decided to mention how thrilled you were with not commenting by commenting.

 

Are you of the opinion that we shouldn't be discussing things on a discussion forum?  It's all on-topic, so how has it gone downhill?