Trying to install X Plane on DVD and I'm getting the too many open folders issues

 

Are you using this http://www.x-plane.com/downloads/x-plane_10_installer-updater/, and not the installer on the DVD (That one is broken)?

Thanks Tony. I found that out by mistake (looking to see if 64 bit and 32 bit installer was different) and had been using it. I tried it three times and the third time I only had one error so decided to see how far I would get and got to the end (it seems). I ran some updates afterwards so I hope that kinda fixed whatever was wrong.

 

I'm not sure of the quality of the actual DVD's themselves.

 

Anyway, seems like it loads so I'll see how it goes!

 

Thanks again.

 

Rich.

Geez I just recently trashed my two years of X-Plane usage for a renewed interest when FSX SE came out.. the improvements there had me dump X-Plane and P3d! X-plane sound system was far too old and weak (still the same one from 1996 you know) and the goofy hazy sky that never extends to the horizon ... the cockpits still too cartooney and goofy and the view from the VC just not real enough for me... remember I am a commercial pilot in real life and have been simming for for 30+ years now and still, the only thing that makes me really think I am flying a real airplane in all its ways is FSX SE now... X-Plane has some great stuff believe me and I spent a small fortune on add-ons like the 777 etc.... but I just love the look, feel, and sound of FSX SE now...that's all I can say

Was wondering about this, after you picked up the 777 a while ago. But getting back to topic,  even though my experiences are along the lines of BobSK8, since returning to simming...................I still really enjoy X-Plane 10 for some of the items it does differently than FSX. I still, just use FSX, haven't downloaded the SE version I bought, and don't have P3D. FSX just works too well, on my new computer system.

 

 Back to X-Plane, the VC's in the Carenados look very good!  Once you figure out how to get the views you want, there are many possibilities for just the right look. Happily, the Carenados in X-Plane are programmed flight dynamic wise, by someone who is very familiar with X-Plane. They fly much better than the FSX version. However, I still find those RealAir & A2A  (FSX/P3D) planes unbeatable for GA flight dynamics.

 

As has been said, the night lighting at airports is awesome with X-Plane. And the sloping runways looks good too..................a lot of the time. Although some are terrible, and even to the point of being un-usable. I know why Microsoft went with flattened runways. There were just too many, to rework one at a time.

 

What I like best about X-Plane 10, is the terrain mesh. The default is very good, and you can go well beyond that, with free downloads as long as you have a good computer, with enough RAM.  I did a lot of real life flying throughout the western USA, and X-Plane just has that detail, that FSX falls short on. But at the same time, when I fly in an area that Orbx is covering for FSX, the look of it all with just beats X-Plane 10 when flying lower to the ground below mountain peaks. Orbx also adds detail to hundreds, if not thousands of airports for FSX, which looks far, far  better than default, and certainly looks better than blank X-Plane airports with only a runway. Contrary to what I've read at other forums, FSX does use an actual real life FAA airport layout for it's buildings, and fueling stations. They are not haphazard.  Some may be out of date at this time. Never the less, Orbx just completely changes them, including vehicles with nigh lights, to add life to the scene. No way, would I give up Orbx, or those payware planes I mentioned. 

 

So..................just run both sims, for the best experience.  BTW, try the XP-10 mountain mesh at sunset. What an amazing and colorful scene. And then there is the water & reflections. With the right computer, the look is something special!

 

Yeah, I am with you on the orbx stuff. It looks stunning, and making short hops between some of the available airports is great.

 

I'll give X Plane a good go over the next few days. Excited to try it out. I'm not uninstalling P3D so I have that to go back and forth with.

 

Rich.

Rich, you're only limited by the amount of hard drive space you have. I have FSX, P3D, XPX, DCS, and Rise of Flight. I use them all at one time or another. I find myself clicking on the XPX icon more and more these days.

 

 

Yeah, I am with you on the orbx stuff. It looks stunning, and making short hops between some of the available airports is great.

 

Yep, something I really miss from FSX and is badly needed in X-Plane.

Yep, something I really miss from FSX and is badly needed in X-Plane.

 

+1 on this

 

This thread actually got me to do a fresh P3D install (I'd gotten a version or 2 behind) and refresh my stuff and I had such a wonderful evening flying around the San Juans for a couple hours in the Cardinal RG.

 

The agony continues of "preferring the XPX sim itself, but preferring the ecosystem of P3D/FSX overall".  Haha

 

 

I'm not that convinced that XP will ever get to where a GA pilot wants it to be for VFR in an area you're intimately familiar with as that goes counter to Austin's "plausible world" concept of generic stuff everywhere.  Hopefully 3rd party will solve that one day (beyond basic rolling your own Ortho) in my lifetime.

 

XP11 also needs a whole lot more variety in stock textures, trees, etc, etc to help people out.

 

By far the biggest weakness of XPX is that no matter where you go or what time of year --- Everything just sort of looks "the same" if you know what I mean.

I'm not that convinced that XP will ever get to where a GA pilot wants it to be for VFR in an area you're intimately familiar with as that goes counter to Austin's "plausible world" concept of generic stuff everywhere.  Hopefully 3rd party will solve that one day (beyond basic rolling your own Ortho) in my lifetime.

 

The technology is there, just have a read through this http://forum.avsim.net/topic/468174-google-earth-flight-sim-most-realistic-scenery-graphics-to-date-2015/ The issue is that source technology isn't being licensed out or is probably prohibitively expensive for a flight simulator. Real data to create scenery this detailed is so incredibly expensive, that it's beyond the realms of most small firms. At the moment the best we have is OpenStreetMap and crowd-sourcing. Now, if we can convince Google they need to develop a full flight simulator ;-).

 

 

By far the biggest weakness of XPX is that no matter where you go or what time of year --- Everything just sort of looks "the same" if you know what I mean.

 

X-Plane 10 has supported regionalisation in textures and autogen since it was released, and if someone wanted to, they could create entire libraries of regional textures and buildings. Here are some I did for Spain:

 

 

 

With this approach, you could fly from say the UK to Spain and have the autogen, trees and ground textures change as you move between regions without any need to reload/switch objects. It just needs the right person/company to come along and do it

I appreciate the response and the thoughts Tony…

 

The problem is that this has been the story with XP literally forever.

 

It's entire existence we've been saying "just wait until so-and-so comes along & does this"

 

And "it just needs someone to come and do this....etc"

 

One would've thought XP had its opportunity immediately when Microsoft bailed, but I'm just not sure they're ever going to get there now that Lockheed Martin is doing their thing.

 

The great mystery has always been "why won't people develop for XP"?

Apparently you can't make money developing for XP or its too hard or something?

Xplane is a good flight simulation software but the scenery is even worse than that of the defualt fsx/p3D, there is also a learning curve but it is well worth it due to the advanced settings and it comes with great camera settings a but like the add-ons Available for fsx.

 

To conclude? Is it worth it? Well considering that every software has it's ups and downs, yes! I feel Xplane is worth the money though the Global edition (entire world) does take up 90GB!

 

 

It's entire existence we've been saying "just wait until so-and-so comes along & does this"

 

Completely agree, it's been a long waiting game with not much around. But you also have to compare where we are now with XP10 and where we are 3 or 4 years ago. Things are very slowly progressing, but the pace of development is pain-staking for most.

 

 

 

The great mystery has always been "why won't people develop for XP"?

 

It's a small niche market with not enough potential paying customers to make the investment in time worth it. Documentation is lacking, incomplete and hasn't been updated since XP8 or XP9. This makes things like custom autogen and roads very difficult without lots of time and hacking away. There are of course many other reasons, but those for me are the main reasons I haven't gone full hog into creating payware scenery and applications.

 

There are promising scenery companies out there, such as Truscenery, XHT-Labs and Beti-X (Who have gone very quiet). I had always hoped one of them would make enough money to kick start an ORBX type company for X-Plane, but it hasn't happened yet.

 

 

It's a small niche market with not enough potential paying customers to make the investment in time worth it. Documentation is lacking, incomplete and hasn't been updated since XP8 or XP9

 

110% agree!

 

So this brings me full circle to the debate about LM resources on Mobile vs Desktop.

 

Perhaps Desktop would make a LOT more money (way more people) if LM would put some resources into actually addressing the reasons people don't use XPX in higher numbers and the reasons devs don't make stuff for it.

 

This gets me back to my lifelong frustration with Austin.  I can't figure out if he doesn't get it, doesn't care, both....doesn't even *want* XP to be a huge player - maybe is just bad at business decisions or not good at strategy and forecasting correct market decisions for his product....

 

...on and on.

 

But at the end of the day your reasons are spot on why nobody develops for XPX and I think it will always be stuck in no mans land until LM addresses the tools and resources to make dev'ing for XP viable, enjoyable and manufacturer supported and endorsed more.

For Austin, possibly he thought mobile would bring in some extra cash, and things can be done with extra cash, so it's a good long term plan. I know people who'd never heard of X Plane, suddenly talking about it work because of the mobile game. I think that's a great thing, and I'm no XPlaner and I don't see me converting any time soon (PMDG for the most part).

 

From there, they could then go back to addressing the desktop version. In terms of long term goals, I don't think that's a bad plan on the whole. But, we'll have to wait and see

 

 

This gets me back to my lifelong frustration with Austin.  I can't figure out if he doesn't get it, doesn't care, both....doesn't even *want* XP to be a huge player

 

I have no doubts Austin is a very clever guy (and it's made him a lot of money). LR has mentioned in the past that their goal isn't to replicate FSX's behaviour, they seem to like to do things their way whether we like it or not and X-Plane is Austin's toy/baby. None of us here (At least from what I know) know what is going on internally at LR and what they're currently working on and their plans are. They all surprised us with the GPS in 10.30, and I'm sure we'll get other surprises (Likely features nobody has really pined for, but will be welcomed non-the-less). They've had so many chances to grab the MSFS crowd (With FSX being cancelled, Flight being a failure, etc), but they still go on as LR always has, and I think most of us are just used to it.

 I'm no XPlaner and I don't see me converting any time soon (PMDG for the most part).

 

I'm not sure why people see X-Plane as some sort of cult to "convert" to. In fact, I don't understand why most simmers don't have multiple sims installed and just use all of them (Unless you're on a Mac or a very limited budget). If you install X-Plane, FSX/P3D won't go anywhere and you can use whatever sim takes your fancy.

I'm not sure why people see X-Plane as some sort of cult to "convert" to. In fact, I don't understand why most simmers don't have multiple sims installed and just use all of them (Unless you're on a Mac or a very limited budget). If you install X-Plane, FSX/P3D won't go anywhere and you can use whatever sim takes your fancy.

 

Money and effort. The thought of paying out for XPlane and then not using it, vs over something like the 777 or some new scenery is not nice. But, you are right. I say the same things about sequels and reboots. Old one is still there