Once the Announcement is made, pretty sure AVSIM is going to crash from the onslaught. 

 

 

That's no lie.  Everyone is going to be spewing opinions and listing a string of demands. :t0104:

 

 

Nothing about this is going to cause the world to end.

 

Sure it will!! And stop pushing logic into such a juicy rage-quit scenario!!! 

 

• While I doubt that this new license agreement will include MS shutting down the FSX activation servers, every single person who buys software dependent on such an activation scheme has to be aware that at some point in the future their software will cease to function.

 

I am not sure that anyone would be allowed to shut down the activation servers without providing an alternative method to use the software. Doesn't that EULA work both ways?

And that was the beginning of his drinking problem...

As long as we're discussing rumors....

 

That's why I'm excited about the ressurection of FSX/Flight. The scuttlebutt is that the requirements will strictly forbid any serious, professional use or learning. Drinking before use will be recommended so when you are finished you won't remember a thing except how much you enjoyed it.

 

8 hours bottle to throttle ----> P3D

 

If there's a cocktail in your preflight check list ---> FS11/Flight Ressurected.

 

Ted

So long as it has wing-flex....I don't care!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It will.......won't it???

I do not understand why....Flight Sim community and FS addon industry do not copy  the successful business model of Linux (and his kernel).

 

I am not a programmer (Surely, it is the reason because i do not undestand why). but we have an open Source Flight Simulator, 'Flight Gear'. With the talent of many of us, we can convert FlightGear in the core, in the backbone of the XXI century  flight simulation.

 

How? With a model of development same than Linux and his kernel.

 

We, the simmers, can add, manipulate the code in order to add to the sim (core) new features.

 

Advantages?

• Flexibility,
• High customization
• no monopoly (not depend from business decisions of a big company).
• strong development
• innovation
• cheap
• better quality (no limited by the skills of the employees of one company). 
• Resources (now, only very big companies have resources to build a sim from scratch in reasonable time frame).
• Multi platform.
• Wide market.

Disadvantages:

• Effort.
• Initial Investment
• Learn new code in order to expand and modify.

 

A free simulator? where is the money?

Using Open Source FlightGear as a base is neccesary be Open Source, its an advantage in order to reduce development times and costs.

 

The Simulator will be a free base simulator (core of the system).

Free simulator core= more potential customer (I think this is the Freemium business model).

Addon developers can make money same as now with FS (modules of weather and combat, aircrafts, sceneries, AI traffic...)

 

Who develop the code?

All people who have the neccessary skills. In the professional way...Universities, Aerospace Agencies, Addon developers, Aircraft companies, aviation companies...In the same way that actualli FlightGear is developed. Supported in infrastructure by E-shops and Flight sim communities.

 

It is not the easy way..we can surrender to other simulators or simply dissapear, but I Think that it is neccesary a change. We Spent 5 years and maybe it's too late or maybe this misterious buyer can rescue the FS franchise...But if FSX is dead forever we need to fight same than Allieds in the D-Day to save our hobby and your jobs.

Ted Striker!! Man this is like meeting Luke Skywalker......You have be my role model for years!!!

 

Surely you can't be serious.

No

 

 

My guess is Mark Zuckerberg . . . after all, Facebook recently bought Oculus VR.

 

That is exactly what I thought...

https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101319050523971

 

A FS platform would be a great basis for VR-"OPS".

 

FS by MS, e.g. FSX or ESP  ("Environmental Simulation Platform" or "Engineering Support Program" or "extrasensory perception"?) could be a good investment for someone searching/shopping for VR-code. 

BTW: LM still states in its P3Dv2.2 features overview the SDK "Oculus Rift integration", but in case of an ESP/FSX license acquisition by facebook that "integration" will probably be thought over...

 

Greetings,

Claus

Surely you can't be serious.

 

I am serious, and don't call me Shirley!

I do not understand why....Flight Sim community and FS addon industry do not copy  the successful business model of Linux (and his kernel).

 

I am not a programmer (Surely, it is the reason because i do not undestand why). but we have an open Source Flight Simulator, 'Flight Gear'. With the talent of many of us, we can convert FlightGear in the core, in the backbone of the XXI century  flight simulation.

 

How? With a model of development same than Linux and his kernel.

 

We, the simmers, can add, manipulate the code in order to add to the sim (core) new features.

 

Advantages?

• Flexibility,
• High customization
• no monopoly (not depend from business decisions of a big company).
• strong development
• innovation
• cheap
• better quality (no limited by the skills of the employees of one company). 
• Resources (now, only very big companies have resources to build a sim from scratch in reasonable time frame).
• Multi platform.
• Wide market.

Disadvantages:

• Effort.
• Initial Investment
• Learn new code in order to expand and modify.

 

A free simulator? where is the money?

Using Open Source FlightGear as a base is neccesary be Open Source, its an advantage in order to reduce development times and costs.

 

The Simulator will be a free base simulator (core of the system).

Free simulator core= more potential customer (I think this is the Freemium business model).

Addon developers can make money same as now with FS (modules of weather and combat, aircrafts, sceneries, AI traffic...)

 

Who develop the code?

All people who have the neccessary skills. In the professional way...Universities, Aerospace Agencies, Addon developers, Aircraft companies, aviation companies...In the same way that actualli FlightGear is developed. Supported in infrastructure by E-shops and Flight sim communities.

 

It is not the easy way..we can surrender to other simulators or simply dissapear, but I Think that it is neccesary a change. We Spent 5 years and maybe it's too late or maybe this misterious buyer can rescue the FS franchise...But if FSX is dead forever we need to fight same than Allieds in the D-Day to save our hobby and your jobs.

 

Every once in a while, somebody steps up and makes a great point.  

Surely you can't be serious.

Hey Hey....I don't make fun of your role model. I am a Prepar3D Pilot and follow the EULA to the letter and that means I must be serious all the time....It not like being one of you silly FSX or X Plane pilots.

 

Ted now take a drink and stop crying...this guy was just silly!!

Oh yeah!

 

I just remembered something about all this! What was it now? Ah...never mind...I forgot it again.

 

Kind regards,

As long as we're discussing rumors....

 

That's why I'm excited about the ressurection of FSX/Flight. The scuttlebutt is that the requirements will strictly forbid any serious, professional use or learning. Drinking before use will be recommended so when you are finished you won't remember a thing except how much you enjoyed it.

 

8 hours bottle to throttle ----> P3D

 

If there's a cocktail in your preflight check list ---> FS11/Flight Ressurected.

 

Ted

 

I always thought it was 8 inches bottle to throttle 

 

 

but we have an open Source Flight Simulator, 'Flight Gear'.

 

FlightGear's development began in 1996 and it's still can't compete with FSX, not to mention P3D or X-Plane.

 

The "community" can't and won't develop it. Let me ask what Ce_Zeta  did to deveop it?

 

In the future Lockheed Martin may choose not to sell P3D to the masses. But that could be another story.

Why would they do that? LM wants to make money so why would they cut off a large portion of their sales?