Prepar3D v3.0?

[Manny 1,293]

 

 

Funny how quickly people jumped on the 64 bit wagon. There is nothing to be gained by this, except you get your OOMs a bit later.

 

Really?

 

But just because they come up with a 64 bit version doesn't mean that you cannot use your current P2D v2.4  Which would be no different than they not coming up with a 64 bit version for the rest of us who are now limited by OOMs. I am unable to take a complete flight into LAX anymore.

[Copper. 78]

Wish for a P3D world where buildings and the ground aren't fluorescent at night; where airports aren't so easily discernable at night; where lights don't look like huge floating orbs - I.e. PAPI on final approach! It's just totally an unconvincing platform for 2014! (not blaming LM).

 

Lighting (true darkness/black/shadows) and performance must be improved significantly. To not address these issues is to offer more of the same. I think the time has come to plan for a completely new platform that utilises current tech and coding practices. Not applying an aged platform to new technology.

 

My 5c worth

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

Really?

 

But just because they come up with a 64 bit version doesn't mean that you cannot use your current P2D v2.4  Which would be no different than they not coming up with a 64 bit version for the rest of us who are now limited by OOMs. I am unable to take a complete flight into LAX anymore.

 

If the component isn't fixed that is eating up the memory, you will get the same OOM no matter how much RAM you have - just later. 

 

On a hypothetical completely new 64 bit architecture, that is not backwards compatible, you wont get any OOMs, that's true. And there are no addons to increase the load - not for a very long time. The way I see it, It took 6 years for the top FSX devs to come up with the really good stuff. And that was on the familliar MS-platform.

[anden145 2,285]

If the component isn't fixed that is eating up the memory, you will get the same OOM no matter how much RAM you have - just later. 

 

On a hypothetical completely new 64 bit architecture, that is not backwards compatible, you wont get any OOMs, that's true. And there are no addons to increase the load - not for a very long time. The way I see it, It took 6 years for the top FSX devs to come up with the really good stuff. And that was on the familliar MS-platform.

 

 

In theory, you're right... but most people shut down their simulator at the end of the flight. As it is now, you're not able to complete a flight (e.g EGLL-KLAX), and at the same time, taking joy of the full detail-level of FSX, without running into an OOM... 

[Guest]

If the component isn't fixed that is eating up the memory, you will get the same OOM no matter how much RAM you have - just later. 

 

And what component is that exactly?   And yes "just later" is fine ... it would be a lot later like 144 hrs later if one has 32GB RAM ... I don't know of anyone that has tried to run P3D for 144 hr unlimited fuel flight?  So "just later" is perfectly acceptable because it's unlikely anyone is going to hit "just later" because memory isn't being consumed at a rate 1GB per minute ... maybe 1GB per 6 hours (assuming it never levels off which it might) ... so 32GB - 4GB - 4GB for OS/Other = 24GB X 6 hours =  144 hrs of non-stop flying in/out of any airport over any part of the globe.  So yeah, "just later" will probably be just fine for 99% of the end users.

 

Your TOTAL RAM:

 

32GB = 144 hrs

16GB = 48 hrs

 

 

 

where lights don't look like huge floating orbs

 

Some of that is LM some is 3rd party fault ... but you should try my suggestions in this thread as it might help you out with some of your issues: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/455299-the-perfect-hdr/

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Kuragiman 227]

I am down with the 64 bit.  When I first built my rig and stuffed 32gigs into it was in the hopes that FSX would use it.  I didn't do my research before I built my system.  I wasted money on stuff that did not help at all at the time.  Of course the 32gigs helps a lot when I am rendering video for publication.   I am fairly happy with with P3D as is.  Just want that added guarantee that I won't crash 6 hours into an overseas flight.

[Guest]

BTW, I couldn't care less if P3D goes 64bit, but only if compatibility is maintained.

 

So you do care then?  And this is about money and not having to buy 64bit upgrades to your existing add-ons?  

 

If you have 30+ years coding experience you'll know that a 32bit DLL will not work in a 64bit taget application.  So any product that uses a 32bit DLL will not be compatible ... they will have to update their DLL to 64bit.  For some this maybe as easy as a re-compile, for others it may require some code changes ... it really depends on how they coded their product and if they coded their product with eyes on the future.

 

Define "efficient" ... resource use, performance, or maintainability and flexibility (some of these are mutually exclusive)?  How I code depends on the business requirements and what's important in those requirements.  There is no "one way or the other" ... it's a matter of coding to the requirements.

 

If performance is of the utmost need then I'll code to that requirement.  If the requirement is "I need the product yesterday" then I'll code to that requirement.  If maintainability is the requirement then I code to that.  If memory usage is a requirement then I'll code to that.  Or if various combinations, I'll balance it out and code to that.  How I design, code, and implement is all defined by the business requirements.

 

It's not 64bit or bust ... it's simply the future ... 32bit will continue, it will just not change and eventually new products will trickle to a halt.  

 

What I don't understand are the folks that don't want change but seem to also not want to see any type of future?  I can understand people being happy with what they have and don't need any more out of a flight simulator, but why go out of one's way to discourage future development?  THE ONLY answer that I can come up with is that those that don't want change really do want change ... meaning they still want 3rd party development to happen on their unchanging platform.  The ONLY way they can justify that is by suggesting more efficient code to be squeezed out of 32bit path to meet that their desires.  So what do folks do, they try to convince other's that 64bit is not needed as it only promotes bad coding ... which is absolutely not the case.

 

It's the same old market share battle.  But I dare suggest you let the cards fall where they may, there is no need to spread conjecture, fear, rumors, or anything like that ... the market will go where it will go and a product will speak for itself.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

Well I don't know. For one I don't think this game of numbers will hold up in reality, you get in all kinds of trouble with a real memory leak. Second, I don't accept this as an excuse not to fix the leak at all.

 

As I said, I'm indifferent about P3D 64 bit - I'm all for it, if compatibility is maintained. But I can't shake the feeling this may be nigh impossible to do. Some of the 3PD aren't even around anymore. Just see how long it takes to adapt to P3D V2 - and we're still in the same ball game here.

 

Ah, sorry, didn't see your post Rob. Wish we could have this conversation over a beer or two.

I don't want to spread fear, and I doubt anyone will experience it when reading my posts. But I would very much like people to think about what they wish for. And be wary about those clever words the marketing guys throw at us. Yes I really have that kind of 'computering' experience, so maybe being an old timer has something to do with this after all :-)

[Christopher Low 5,359]

Switching to 64bit is inevitable, but not being able to use my existing addons in any future version would be a hard sell for me at the outset. I understand how difficult it would be to achieve backwards compatibility with a 64bit version, and also why it would probably be best to just "cut all ties" with the 32bit version, but I have spent a lot of time, money and effort getting the UK upgraded in FSX (and now P3D), and the thought of having to do it all over again sounds like a nightmare to me :(

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

Thank you, Christopher. At least I'm not alone.

 

At first there should not be that much of a nightmare, because there wont be any addons for a while. Then we will get the usual pile of quick-to-market crap. Then there may emerge some gems. And so on. We have been through this, maybe even more than once. Doesn't make it one bit more attractive to me. All this provided that there will actually be a 3PD who is willing to support this niche of a niche, while XP and Doveflight get dumped on Steam.

[kevinfirth 1,396]

first of all it probably wont be all addons that dont work in 64bit, only those with a custom dll component. and as rob says, a decent proportion will just require recompiling in 64bit.

 

so 3PDs will in some cases be quick to release a 64bit compatible version, and some others will take a bit of time, and lots of scenery may still work just fine.

 

there may be some charges for compatible versions but thats just fine with me for the benefits it will bring...

[mgh 89]

The latest thread thart I'm aware of on 64 bit was from WBard on January 20, 2014, 16:33:
 

I thought I commented before that the 2.1 features like SLI, cloud shadows, etc, are on hold for the moment til we get all the issues resolved. We haven't announced anything on a 64bit version yet , and it's not that easy with this code base being as large and dynamic as it is. And if we do release a 64 bit version, keep in mind a lot of current addons won't work directly wmith it and will need to be recompiled or in some cases re-engineered completely.

 

Is there any later information from Lockheed Martin?


 

[alulekk 3]

Go 64 bit, be forward looking, don't worry about existing add-ons (like FSX people, they can continue to use the latest 32bit P3D version).

Don't turn P3D into Windows and worry about never ending backwards compatibility.

 

Change takes some pain sometimes.

[Guest]

For one I don't think this game of numbers will hold up in reality, you get in all kinds of trouble with a real memory leak. Second, I don't accept this as an excuse not to fix the leak at all.

 

The numbers are reality ... just monitor them in a long flight and you'll see the reality on your system.  That reality will change a little based on one's add-ons and graphics settings, but is predictable and verifiable.

 

You're also making an assumption there is a memory leak ... the release of resources is part P3D and part OS.  And finally, if there is a real memory leak, how do you know it's LM's issue and not 3rd party issue?  I've done 16 hr flights in P3D v2.3 and v2.4 base (betas with NO add-ons) without an OOM.

 

But to be clear, memory leaks are NOT the sole domain of LM ... any 3rd party DLL, EXE, BGL, etc. etc. can be a source of memory leaks.  Given that we want 3rd party products and given that there will NEVER be any assurance of zero memory leaks from these products, we have to face the reality and solve the problem with a 64bit platform.

 

 

 

Some of the 3PD aren't even around anymore.

 

And why is that?  You see why 64bit is needed now - it really is the door of opportunity - this platform can expand well beyond just flight simulation if it had room to breathe ... bringing in entire new markets from Combat to trains, to boats, to trucking ...and yes even goats if that's what floats ya boat?  Then you have a MUCH larger 3rd party market.  But for 32bit NONE of that is going to fit into a 4GB world ...  no amount of memory conservation, performance tuning is going make a "world" simulator live in a 32bit space.

 

 

Yes I really have that kind of 'computering' experience, so maybe being an old timer has something to do with this after all :-)

 

Naaah, I'm an old timer also ... I started coding 1980 and had a few games "published" by early to mid 80's (back then I gave away the source code) ... think I posted the articles of my games here some moons ago.  I think you're really just having a problem with a market shift because it means development for your existing setup will eventually dry up ... it's a valid concern, but no one is stopping you from enjoying what you have, no one is forcing you to dump what you have ... enjoy your existing investment it while it lasts, to be honest it'll probably last a decade or more.

 

And yes you are introducing fear:

 

 

 

But I would very much like people to think about what they wish for. And be wary about those clever words the marketing guys throw at us.

 

The 32bit world isn't going to end any time soon ... who knows, maybe Dovetail will keep it alive and kicking for much longer.  But I suggest you monitor the 64bit world of FS and see where it goes ... maybe times will change and you will change your priorities.

 

 

 

Is there any later information from Lockheed Martin?

 

If 64bit does not happen, I will not be here.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[mgh 89]

 

 

If 64bit does not happen, I will not be here.

 

In other words,  there isn't any futher public information from Lockheed Martin. Otherwise you would have said so, instead of equivocating..