Robert,

 

I understand that you may not be able to answer this, but in light of your comment regarding ongoing compatibility for 64-bit, if i was to purchase P3D V2 and a PMDG aircraft, would you support that aircraft in P3D V3 64-bit (assuming that V3 is 64-bit of course), would their be an additional cost? 

Im no programmer, just more hardware guy, but I would suffice to say that once 64 bit comes around, everything will be broken not just PMDG aircraft. Sceneries, certain tools, other aircraft etc. You have to have 64 bit version addons if the simulator itself will be 64bit, meaning they have to recode it. How long that process takes and if it needs to be funded is a loaded question and depends on too many factors. When xplane went 64 bit I believe everything broke, but patches were issued fairly  quickly. But thats xplane coding. FSX/P3D is a different animal.

 

Perhaps the devs can comment and give you better insight. 

everything will be broken not just PMDG aircraft.

Yes, i have no doubt about that.

 

 

 

How long that process takes and if it needs to be funded is a loaded question and depends on too many factors

PMDG (RSR) has already commented that they would be looking at the release and "providing customers an upgrade path to 64-bit".  I was wondering about the specifics of that comment.

 

 

 

Perhaps the devs can comment and give you better insight. 

I was indeed asking for Robert (or PMDG generally) to comment providing more insight.  Honestly, i don't expect an answer, PMDG certainly don't owe me an answer and my question was simply because i was curious, it's possible that they don't even have the exact path in mind as no 64-bit version of P3D exists at the minute.

 

The reason i am curious is like most simmers i am growing pretty tired of OOM's, the PMDG 777 (no doubt a Masterpiece) has pushed the envelope about as far as it can go in terms of memory usage; i don't think it would be unfair to say perhaps a little beyond the envelope.

 

I have tried X-Plane, we didn't get on.  So my only path for simulation in future is going to be P3D and the only reason i would move is for 64-Bit.  Personally, I would like to see companies like PMDG, Majestic, ORBX et-al moving over to DCS, i just don't think that will happen.

Hopefully we don't need to buy it again if we bought it for fsx and switched to p3d. Like active sky next, you didn't need to buy it again once it was released for p3d.

If you read the previous posts by RSR, chances are VERY small that it will be a free upgrade.

The guys have been putting lots and lots of time in it, don't expect them to have been working for free.

I left FSX behind at about 500' AGL on my first P3D flight and I haven't looked back.  Sure my aircraft choices have been a bit limited and the PMDG aircraft have been sorely missed, but I knew it was just a matter of time as FSX will not live forever.

 

The fidelity of PMDG will add a wonderful depth to P3D and I can't wait to slap down my money for anything PMDG puts out.

 

Tim

Yes but why would we pay again? They didnt change anything with the program itself. All they did was got the correct licensing to use it in P3D? We shouldnt need to pay again...

Why do simmers expect to get everything for free? Would you work for nothing?

Yes but why would we pay again? They didnt change anything with the program itself. All they did was got the correct licensing to use it in P3D? We shouldnt need to pay again...

 

It isn't quite that simple.  While the code bases are very similar PMDG will no doubt have to make changes, those changes cost money; beyond that there is the legal minefield of licensing on a different platform, PMDG (allegedly) have a close relationship with Boeing, Boeing themselves might be happy to allow PMDG to develop the aircraft for an entertainment sim, but have issues with P3D marketing itself as a commercial sim.

 

On the other hand, there does seem to be a marked difference between European companies that are supporting P3D out of the box often with no additional charges and American companies that are far more cautious, perhaps it is the litigious nature of American society?

 

Obviously if you are unhappy with the double charging policy you could take your business to another developer.

It isn't quite that simple.  While the code bases are very similar PMDG will no doubt have to make changes, those changes cost money; beyond that there is the legal minefield of licensing on a different platform, PMDG (allegedly) have a close relationship with Boeing, Boeing themselves might be happy to allow PMDG to develop the aircraft for an entertainment sim, but have issues with P3D marketing itself as a commercial sim.

 

On the other hand, there does seem to be a marked difference between European companies that are supporting P3D out of the box often with no additional charges and American companies that are far more cautious, perhaps it is the litigious nature of American society?

 

Obviously if you are unhappy with the double charging policy you could take your business to another developer.

 

 

As we say in Spain, it can be said higher, but not clearer. Nice description of the situation.

 

 

On the other hand, there does seem to be a marked difference between European companies that are supporting P3D out of the box often with no additional charges and American companies that are far more cautious, perhaps it is the litigious nature of American society?

 

First, I have to say, I agree with your post - I'm just pulling this one line to clarify a little, based on my opinion.

 

With so many companies in the aviation realm operating as international businesses, I highly doubt that it has much to do with the litigious nature of 'murica.  I think it's more that they just don't truly understand the scope of what they're doing.  Another aspect of it might be a doubt that anything would come of it.  I mean, I'm sure we've all heard of paying people under the table.  Most first would countries have laws against that, because all income must be taxed (and if not taxed, then at least declared).  Still, it happens because there are layers of separation between the two parties (gov and payer/payee).

 

That said, we do take lawsuits to new levels here, especially with tort.  It's unfortunate.  People now don't have the same cool stuff I had when I was a kid (dang, I'm not even that old).  Seriously, though: the pool I was a lifeguard at in high school was 5' deep max, so it obviously didn't have a diving board.  Not a single pool in the community had a pool depth greater than 5' - deeper is more difficult to insure.  Meanwhile, the community I grew up in (only about 15 miles away, but 20-30 years older) had a diving board at just about every pool, and a 1m floppy board at a couple of them (though they did nix the 3m board for insurance reasons - got too expensive for the same reasons I'm already alluding to).  Stupid...

You mean p3Dv2 right ?

You mean p3Dv2 right ?

 

Wait, when you say FSX, does that mean FSX, or FSX with the service packs, or FSX with Accell???

 

Pretty sure the term is used as all-encompassing when not otherwise specified.

Wait, when you say FSX, does that mean FSX, or FSX with the service packs, or FSX with Accell???

 

Pretty sure the term is used as all-encompassing when not otherwise specified.

ok thank you for the info, I've asked because p3D and p3DV2 are two differents products...

ok...... I hope that PMDG is already working on p3d product, cause We need it, I'm an owner of the fsx version and I will pay for the p3d one cause pmdg 777 is an exceptional product, but fsx is the past, and we can't mantain fsx in our drives only for. the 777.....so.please let we know if you are working on it.....only this please

 

 

Our first product for release on the Lockheed Martin P3D platform is currently in development and is anticipated for release sometime during 4Q14/1Q15.
 
We currently anticipate that the PMDG 777-200LR/F will be the first product released for use with P3D.  All other PMDG products for P3D will follow later.

 

Was it that hard to read the first post? Everything you're asking is written there plain and simple.