Yes sir, by cpt. Robert Randazzo:

PMDG Development for Xplane:

We are nearing completion on our first project for Xplane!  As we have previously mentioned, this project is designed to be a development catalyst to help us learn how to work with that platform more effectively- and it has been a great exercise thus far.

 

We will be unveiling the project sometime in the next 60 days (estimated) and we will also announce the second project for Xplane at that time...

Ok Albert. I thought something new had surfaced.

 

thanks

Has news been announced?

This was posted in the PMDG forum by Capt. Randazzo:

PMDG Development for Xplane:

We are nearing completion on our first project for Xplane!  As we have previously mentioned, this project is designed to be a development catalyst to help us learn how to work with that platform more effectively- and it has been a great exercise thus far.

 

We will be unveiling the project sometime in the next 60 days (estimated) and we will also announce the second project for Xplane at that time...

We're closing in on that 60 day timeframe. 

You seem to think that I'm agitated. Cynicism is not automatically hysterical.

 

In any event, I certainly didn't miss your point. I would seriously contest your characterization of FSX as "streamlined" in its interface. There's nothing streamlined about changing key bindings in it and how much of that is still inadequate without a paid for version of FSUIPC? I think people just keep forgetting how many utilities they can't live without in FSX before it becomes adequate. Its fair I suppose. When you have to have this many its easy to lose count.

Textual wording is often misconstrued as it carries at best little inflection, however you are correct that just FSX default is lack luster at best, I for one am running about 6-7 additional programs that enhance FSX to be more stable and realistic. That being said with any popular flight simulator you will have plenty of 3rd party enhancements that range from WX systems, to tweaking tools, to aircraft.

"why can people learn to program complex FMS' or navigate VORs or learn to comprehend SIDs and STARs and min max the hell out of cfg files but won't make a passing attempt at using a perfectly useful interface?"

 

Simply because it's part of the simluation. We don't want to be challenged with a UI. We DO want to be challenged with the simulation itself.

 

My comments on the two UIs is the FSX UI is problematic, because it doesn't let you adjust half of what you can adjust in the CFG file. It's harder to find tune the settings in the UI itself without going to the CFG file.

 

XP on the other hand has some pretty powerful options and monitoring tools.