One wonders about the compatibility of add-ons, between a 32bit & 64bit program.

One wonders about the compatibility of add-ons, between a 32bit & 64bit program.

 

Well, to determine that, you'd have to have both a 32 bit and a 64 bit version of a program

 

The only one I know of is X-Plane. And by the way, that is a perfect example of what I stated in my last post.  X-Plane will crash and get OOM errors just like FSX in it's 32 bit version, but will not in its 64 bit version...

 

Regarding the addons themselves, from the little I read they're not compatible unless made for 64 bit (or was that the plugins? or both? anyway, look it up )

Ok. So we have to consider a 64bit version, if & when it is released, as a completely new sim, with all it's inherent teething problems & probably none, or verly little add-on's.

 

I do apologise, as this topic is not really relevant to the original posting, however, to sum up with our choices:

FSX:Gold (yes, still available)

FSX:SE

P3D

X-Plane

The future claimed release from Dovetail

The future claimed 64bit release of P3D.

 

The poor developers! (& obviously us!)

I am well versed in 32-bit versus 64-bit. My first programming job was on a CDC 1604 mainframe... long before a PC existed. I still write software today.

 

As a developer, I'm telling you that the OOMs are caused by the insane levels of memory usage by addons. Increasing the amount of memory available isn't the correct response to poor development approaches. They'll just take advantage of that and make things even worse.

 

I understand that you can't see this, but as a developer, I can.

 

While I agree 64-bit needs to come (in due time, no serious rush)... more realistic expectations and self-imposed limitations by developers is the best approach.

Ok. So we have to consider a 64bit version, if & when it is released, as a completely new sim, with all it's inherent teething problems & probably none, or verly little add-on's.

 

I do apologise, as this topic is not really relevant to the original posting, however, to sum up with our choices:

FSX:Gold (yes, still available)

FSX:SE

P3D

X-Plane

The future claimed release from Dovetail

The future claimed 64bit release of P3D.

 

The poor developers! (& obviously us!)

 

Hey, at least it's all fun!

 

Seriously I'm beginning to see what most ppl her that have been around longer than I have already know (and are probably laughing at me about):

 

The heaviy cost of all this simming fun is in the addons

 

 

I mean, the idea (and conclusion) I'm coming up with as we continue this discussion, is that we can have fun trying all these sims out and eventually you'll get into using one you like best more than the rest maybe (with the chance to still spin up the others whenever you feel like it).

 

The sims themselves are pretty affordable if you consider that:

 

FSX SE has been on sale for only $5  (and wil likely be on sale again, since Steam normally has these big sales like 3 or 4 times a year...), with a 75% discount

X-Plane 10: Not as much but again on Steam it has been at 50% during their sales for $30.

Prepar3D: This is probably the most expensive at $60 minimum for the cheapest license. I have no knowledge if these ever go on sale, maybe other folks would know, but it's still not that much, and less if you add the cost of all 3 up and mace an average

 

So let's just keep simming..

I am well versed in 32-bit versus 64-bit. My first programming job was on a CDC 1604 mainframe... long before a PC existed. I still write software today.

 

As a developer, I'm telling you that the OOMs are caused by the insane levels of memory usage by addons. Increasing the amount of memory available isn't the correct response to poor development approaches. They'll just take advantage of that and make things even worse.

 

I understand that you can't see this, but as a developer, I can.

 

While I agree 64-bit needs to come (in due time, no serious rush)... more realistic expectations and self-imposed limitations by developers is the best approach.

 

Dude... I never disagreed on what causes the OOM. I know that's what it is. Iagree it's not the answer but you're seeing it from an optimization point of view, not as a "quick an dirty" solution.  Again Considering no bugs/flaws like memory leak exist, if I want to run 8GBs of addons today I can't. With a 64 bit prog, I *can*

 

You're not saying it won't work, you're just saying they'll "take advantage of that" meaning larger addons. You don't want to "encourage" them to keep up what is according to you bad behavior on their part (which on the other hand I can't vouch for that being correct or if the fact is that they simply need that much memory for what you want to see on-screen, and the fact that we want every addon and their brother to make the world as real as possible...). And that's fine, I get that. Now for the practical part, with a 64bit prog,  you think they will they make addons that require 8TB of VAS? Really...?

 

Once again, clearest current and existing example of this: 64 bit X-Plane. Has no such issues  (sim quality and preference/opinions aside).

 

Regarding this bit:

 

"While I agree 64-bit needs to come (in due time, no serious rush)... more realistic expectations and self-imposed limitations by developers is the best approach."

 

True, no rush. But, without 100% certainty that developers are not optimizing their products (or even if they're not), I think a more realistic statement would be:

 

"more realistic expectations and self-imposed limitations by *users* is the best approach"

 

You can't cram 300 lbs of cookies in a 50 lb sack...

Sure you can... if there's a leak (hole in the bottom). :wink:

Sure you can... if there's a leak (hole in the bottom). :wink:

 

Ah, but you see, your bag crashed with an OOM  (out of munching potential )

 

 

As a developer, I'm telling you that the OOMs are caused by the insane levels of memory usage by addons.

 

FT Toronto comes to mind ... I couldn't load that airport let alone fly it and I'm good about managing my VAS.  Some features of that airport I'll never see ... I'm sure they'll probably look great, but ...

 

I understand the desire behind large airport developers, make the biggest and best airport as they attempt to one up the competition - and they do a great job.  Thankfully there is a configuration panel so I can turn most of it off and then download the reduce texture size files and load those up ... but I can't imagine trying to fly a PMDG  or CS 777 out of this airport.

 

I think this is where Orbx realized the long term problem of VAS limits and as such have concentrated on smaller but higher detailed airports.

 

So what's next?   ... send the 3DSMax model files so we can tour the airport in 3DSMax so we can at least see all the work that we can't load?

 

I would urge ... ok plea with 3rd party large airport developers to restrain themselves (for as long as we're on a 32bit platform FSX/P3D) ... I know their is competition, but the airport I'm going to use the most is the one I can fly in/out from using a complex aircraft that is typical for large airports.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I saw on the FT Toronto Demo Video the fan blades spinning on the HVAC units on the roof of the terminal building and that right there pretty much turned me off. I get poor performance in Toronto even without adding this airport to it so I will pass and save $40

 

But yes when developers can get more they will take it and use up resources on features like this.

This FSX/P3D discussion has become academic. 

 

I have recently looked at the Just Flght shop and see that FSX DVD version has become Discontinued.  If you look on E-bay you will see FSX DVD's for sale for UKP +100.

 

So I think that closes the topic.

 

Tregarth

This FSX/P3D discussion has become academic. 

 

I have recently looked at the Just Flght shop and see that FSX DVD version has become Discontinued.  If you look on E-bay you will see FSX DVD's for sale for UKP +100.

 

So I think that closes the topic.

FSX is still available via Steam, so no the argument er, I mean discussion may continue...

Been over 10 years since FS2004 was released and there are still people using that one....Therefore FSX may still have another 8 years to go before tapering off in interest. But you bet in 2026 there will still be a loyal FSX fan base of about 2000 people keeping the dream alive 20 years later.

 

Most likely FSX will be freely distributed and easily run on a Windows 7 Emulator 50 years from now, wonder if I will be getting 1000 fps by then 

& still available here in South Africa for about $14!

My advice is if you are just starting out, go the P3D route,   If you are already heavily invested in FSX like me and a few others here, might be better to hold off until FSX really dies, which is a long ways off still.  FSX will be 'dead' in my book when the developers stop investing their time for it.   When A2A/PMDG/RealAir...etc stops investing 1000s of R&D project hours in FSX and they say, 'we no longer build addons for FSX',  Until then, there is plenty of good use left for FSX.   Me and my Hitchhiker's GUide to the Galaxy plan on waiting until P3D V4.2 is out.

 

Cheers

TJ

 

 

I'm telling you that the OOMs are caused by the insane levels of memory usage by addons.

 

Best comment of 2015…..and probably 2014 as well.  :Applause: