Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

roarkr

I have just one question to PMDG: Are we ever to see a B737 NGX SDK v2 update?

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

After almost 3 years since the first release of PMDG B737 NGX some of us are still waiting for the SDK v2 release in order to implement some missing/non-faulty Events and Variables

for our B737 NGX Home Cockpits.

 

I have just one question to PMDG:  Are we ever to see a B737 NGX SDK v2 update?

 

 


Roar Kristensen    www.flightsim4fun.com

P3Dv4 with Opencockpits hardware controlled by OC4BAv4 for immersive PMDG B737/777/747 flying

XPLANE 11 with Opencockpits hardware controlled by OC4BA_XP for immersive  B737 flying

rmMShli.jpg?1 WylQl0J.jpg?3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short answer: I think no!

 

They don't have in sight SP2 for 737NGX (after 3 years) and SDK depends of SP2 release.

 

Israel DOleo - MROC


Israel D' Oleo Ochoa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, with the development of wx radar for the T7, there will be a general clamor for the NGX SP1d or SP2.  I think PMDG will respond to that consumer demand...


2014-1-3_22-52-44-860.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would like to see a weather radar on the 737, but i somehow doubt it will come out. Of course, maybe they just delayed updates specifically to put the wx radar in there. Only PMDG knows...


Cristi Neagu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I have just one question to PMDG:  Are we ever to see a B737 NGX SDK v2 update?

 

If you were to spend a little time with the forum search function, you'd see that it's mentioned in several places that SP2 for the NGX has always been referenced as an update that would include some of the optimizations/advances from the 777.  You can't have an update that includes optimizations/advances from the 777 without the 777.  The 777 was only recently released ("recently" being used relatively here), and the SP for the 777 is highly important, as you wouldn't want to roll unfixed updates from the 777 back into the 737.

 

It's not an issue of "omg, we haven't seen an update, which means it's never going to happen."

 

It's an issue of "Project B must be completed before Project A can receive optimizations and advances from Project B."

 

It's a similar issue to "YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS."


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were to spend a little time with the forum search function, you'd see that it's mentioned in several places that SP2 for the NGX has always been referenced as an update that would include some of the optimizations/advances from the 777.  You can't have an update that includes optimizations/advances from the 777 without the 777.  The 777 was only recently released ("recently" being used relatively here), and the SP for the 777 is highly important, as you wouldn't want to roll unfixed updates from the 777 back into the 737.

 

It's not an issue of "omg, we haven't seen an update, which means it's never going to happen."

 

It's an issue of "Project B must be completed before Project A can receive optimizations and advances from Project B."

 

It's a similar issue to "YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS."

 

Hi

 

My question was about the SDK, not the B737 main code. I don't see any reason waiting for additional coding of the T7 before some missing/faulty behavior of the Events/Variables for the NGX

 

I'm really happy with PMDG aircrafts, but I believe tPMDG should do much better by faster micro-updates for already released aircrafts/SDKs.

 

Most of these issues can't be that complicated to resolve.

 

There are other companies out there that are much faster and customer oriented than PMDG in the matter.

 

I only wish PMDG could improve in this matter as it is not good enough by today's standard in my opinion.

 

 

If a car company had to wait to correct some missing/faulty light behavior on a 2011 model because they needed to develop an another 2014 type model first, I believe a lot of customer would complain. To me this is not a good maintenance/development business work model.

 

I also believe most customer would gladly pay something for this type of maintenance updates.

 

But, at the end this is PMDG's choice, to do what they want.

 

And finally, it was just a question, nothing more and nothing less. I though that was the reason for having an open forum.


Roar Kristensen    www.flightsim4fun.com

P3Dv4 with Opencockpits hardware controlled by OC4BAv4 for immersive PMDG B737/777/747 flying

XPLANE 11 with Opencockpits hardware controlled by OC4BA_XP for immersive  B737 flying

rmMShli.jpg?1 WylQl0J.jpg?3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


My question was about the SDK, not the B737 main code. I don't see any reason waiting for additional coding of the T7 before some missing/faulty behavior of the Events/Variables for the NGX
 
I'm really happy with PMDG aircrafts, but I believe tPMDG should do much better by faster micro-updates for already released aircrafts/SDKs.

 

I'm curious as to what's wrong with the SDK (I haven't messed with it much, personally).  Regardless, with the wave of updates between SP1C and SP2, I wouldn't be surprised if the SDK gets a makeover as well.

 

 

 


Most of these issues can't be that complicated to resolve.
 
There are other companies out there that are much faster and customer oriented than PMDG in the matter.
 
I only wish PMDG could improve in this matter as it is not good enough by today's standard in my opinion.

 

You'd be surprised.  Seemingly "simple" fixes can be quite complex.

 

Additionally, it isn't necessarily a matter of being simple to fix.  It's a matter of change management.  If you release a new version every day via the old method (where it isn't managed "Steam-style" though an update management program*), it becomes burdensome to ensure everything is tied together properly.  For those who purchased the product on day one, if they need to re-install, they need to re-install all of the SPs and hotfixes in order to get running again.  That can be a really ugly process.  Also, how many hotfixes necessitate a SP?  Do you take the hotfixes down when you release the SP?  How do you communicate to the end user that this is being done (so that they don't freak out when they go to re-install and all the HFs are gone, with SPs in their place)?  Moreover, do you keep the most up-to-date version in the store so that a new customer gets the most up-to-date product and doesn't have to download all of the HFs and SPs?  That requires extra maintenance by someone on the team to update the installer regularly, in addition to managing all of the HFs and SPs.  Beyond that, are the SPs cumulative: if there's an SP1 and SP2, do you need to install SP1 first and then 2, or do you just need to install SP2, because it includes the code for SP1?  If SP2 is cumulative, how do you ensure that it won't conflict with those who have already installed SP1?

 

Software change management is a complicated process.  It kinda bothers me that people think it's so simple, but I guess that's why I get paid to do what I do: most people don't know, so people pay me to know.

 

*If you're unfamiliar with "Steam-style," iOS and its Applications program manages updates centrally and alerts you to new versions, updates, and installs them

 

 

 


If a car company had to wait to correct some missing/faulty light behavior on a 2011 model because they needed to develop an another 2014 type model first, I believe a lot of customer would complain. To me this is not a good maintenance/development business work model.

 

This isn't a fair comparison, really, but I'll point out a few flaws:

 

The E36 BMWs (3-series models from the 90s) had an issue where the rear suspension mounts weren't as strong as they should've been.  This was never corrected.  For owners who experienced failures at that structural weak point, it was usually after the warranty period, which means you either scrapped the car, or had a metal worker weld things back together and reinforce it.  Only aftermarket parts groups sold reinforcement plates at a cost to the car owner.  Additionally, those models also suffered from weak adhesive on the overhead and side panels.  This caused the headliner to sag, and the vinyl on the door panels to de-laminate.  Again, despite this being a known issue, BMW never fixed it for those models.  They only fixed the issue going forward (E46 and beyond).  No amount of complaining was going to get them to fix that for me.

 

Even to your point, E36s did have several evolutions within the product group.  As an example, earlier model E36s did not have VANOS, while later models did.  Customers who bought the E36 in 1993 did not get VANOS engines, while those in 1998 did.  The VANOS engine, of course, was an enhancement that BMW picked up through developing other projects that they rolled back into the later models of the E36.

 

While I understand the point that you're trying to make - that glaring issues should just be fixed - I don't see any glaring issues that need to be fixed.  As such, the practice of simply rolling back updates from projects that have been released later is actually quite reasonable.  That really has no parallels in the automotive industry (or if there are any, they're very few and far between).


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, im just curiose to know what you know that others dont, and are willing to pay you for? :huh:


Luke Pype

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a similar issue to "YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS."

 

I actually laughed out loud at this analogy hahaha. (wonder how many people here even know what the reference is)


Ryan Maziarz
devteam.jpg

For fastest support, please submit a ticket at http://support.precisionmanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually laughed out loud at this analogy hahaha. (wonder how many people here even know what the reference is)

 

Yessss!  I was hoping someone would get it.  Had a feeling you would, even if nobody else did.


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a similar issue to "YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS."

 

I actually laughed out loud at this analogy hahaha. (wonder how many people here even know what the reference is)

OK, I confess, I'm an old guy, don't play video games, and didn't get it.  :(  But fortunately, Mr Google knew it and explained it to me. That Mr Google sure knows a lotta stuff!  :lol:

Al

PS: I don't consider FSX a "video game".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe SP2 will be related to the release of the P3D version? That would make sense in some way

 

Michael


Michael Moe

 

fs2crew_747_banner1.png

Banner_FS2Crew_Emergency.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just one question to PMDG:  Are we ever to see a B737 NGX SDK v2 update?

 

Short answer: No

Long answer: I did say no, didn't I?


Jon Kinket

Take it, or leave it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Short answer: No
Long answer: I did say no, didn't I?

 

Based on what information, exactly?  Did you even bother to read what I wrote above?  All of this doom and gloom because something hasn't come out yet isn't quite founded in reality.  SP2 is, and always has been, intended to incorporate the updates from the 777.  Without a SP'd 777, there's no real point in trying to roll back updates from it into the 737, is there?

 

Logic.

Logic, people...

 

PS: egll downvoted my response to Ryan?  Really?  No wonder the guy is on my block list...


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...