>>>Having said this, you must also consider that Microsoft is>>both a NASDAQ company, AND, an American company, and labour>>law forbids recruiting someone without first issuing a job>>description in a public manner. Thereafter anyone is free to>>answer the job offer!>>Don't know what labor laws you're referring to, but they're>definitely not American. Headhunters recruit talent every day>in the U.S. without publishing public job offers.>Most of those are just building databases of resumes to offer to customers, they're cold-calling.The rest have genuine offers which are public. They become public when the issueing company contacts the headhunter to fill the position.Non-public recruiting would mean the company acting as their own headhunter and never making the job opening known anywhere.I don't know if those laws exist for companies in the US. I do know they exist over here for government agencies.This goes so far that they have to publish the opening in newspapers and through the job banks even if they already know (through internal promotion) who's going to fill the job.

>That's what I mean.>>You see FS9 is not a $60 game. It's typically $600 or more>depending on what you have got.>>So if a new game was developed for those wanting a fully>functional grown up simulator that has great aircraft and>great scenery rith of the bat then; maybe it's worth doing.>And in 3 days time at most people'd complain it was not up to scratch because the doohicky has the wrong colour or the switch makes just the wrong clicksound.They'd scramble to make addons to improve on it and complain that the original product wasn't good enough.Unless of course you make it impossible to create addons in which case they'll complain that there is no option to expand the product and not buy it in the first place.This is an increasingly hostile market for the platform manufacturer, as your attitude towards Microsoft shows quite plainly.Don't expect to be treated any differently.

Hi Peter,All I can say is, if you are able to produce the flight simulator you propose, I would be first in line to purchase it!!!.Mike

Sorry chiming in late.Peter, this is all interesting and I agree with a lot of the points. I couldn't help though to comment on some :)>Microsoft don't seem to want to try and get the best of the best. They never contacted anyone I knew and offered a job. As a result we never saw a better aircraft or better anything really that's down to a specific talent or skill set.Well, I have to say I wouldn't expect MS doing active head hunting. If you want to work for them, you approach them, not vice versa. To give MS credit, one of the PMs started a thread right in this forum just a few weeks ago advertising the fact that there are 3 open positions currently...>Aircraft has not got much better since about FS98. That's like almost 8 years, way too long for me. I can remember aircraft being better than FS default today in FS2000 so what's happening with the sim?Well, I agree with you, but let's be realistic. How long does it take to build a top notch aircraft? How many people does it take? If you add up the numbers and look at how many aircraft MSFS has out of the box, I think you'll overcaptalise - MS wouldn't be able to afford hiring enough people from the revenue generated. I'm quite sure the current staff are very good. The historic aircraft in FS2004 can compete with some 3rd party offerings, the older default ones not, but there was a hint dropped some time ago that some of the GA aircraft will get a massive workover in the next FS. It all comes down to resources - after all most 3rd party aircraft are labours of love, and don't follow resonable economics. I really think if MS would hire some of the top dogs in aircraft design, we still won't get better planes. Even the best of the best still need plenty of time to produce top quality - time they won't have when working on a real production schedule.>I'm also saying perhaps there is room for a new simulator where top people are rucruited from this talent base.Maybe, maybe not. I think this is a very interesting question. Moving away from flight simming, this is exactly happening in racing sims at the moment. ISI has cut their bonds with EA and just released rFactor - a labour of love racing sim for gearhead simmers, not joe average. The guys who made GPL are doing the same, but no final product in sight yet. I guess over time this will answer the question if this is indeed a workable business model.Back to the flight sim crowd, I just browsed through the avsim libraries hot downloads. Over the last year, the top aircraft generated about 150,000 downloads taking the crown. Quite surprising how low this number is. There are only 150,000 people who care enough to download a top plane for free. Much lower numbers for other aircraft. So how big is the gearhead simming crowd really? Then again Austin from X-Plane seems to survive ok, and there certainly was a good market for Fly! The problem I'm seeing is that you need a lot of capital to get a new sim off the grounds, maybe too much to be worth the risk. After all, technical excellence isn't everything that provides a sales success...Then again - you got me interested :)>Just imagine how good a sim we could have if somebody actively got top guys who have proved they can do an excelllent job and people buy their work.Agreed, we would get a great sim. But would it generate enough to feed those top guys too? Or other way round, can the same top guys produce the same top notch sim given a budget that is smaller than what the sim will earn in sales? Not suggesting the answer is no, but to get the thing started you need to convince all parties involved that the answer is yes, and prove to them (expecially the people investing the money) why this is so.>For example; I contacted them ages ago and said I could do water and clouds for them but they didn't even respond to me let alone want to talk to see where it went.Hehe, done similar things. I once (a few years ago) had written a document sent it to MS NZ (I was living in Welligton at the time), where it got passed from one hand to another, even via the Games Studio manager in Redmond (so I was told). Guess where it bounced back unanswered. I often think: would be nice if once in a while we could pick those guys brains. Other game studios have some level of interaction going. But I don't blame the FS team either. They are putting in some efforts, recently even almost providing public feedback. Not enough for my taste, but if I were on the FS team myself I might very well think differently about that.>But I wonder if they work exclusively on Flight sim or if they in fact mulit task on various projects. Well, as far as I know, FS is developped by the Aces Studio, which used to be the Simulations Product Unit (probably just a rename) within the Games Studio at MS. They also develop CFS and the latest rumours say there is a CFS4 in development. But apart from that I'm not aware that people work on other things. Mind you - I have no clue how big the staff turnover is. I know that some people come from different backgrounds within MS, quite varied backgrounds actually.>But with a Monopoly......it's dead and sluggish. With competition it's awesome.100% agreed.Well, you got me interested enough to watch this space and see where it leads to :)Cheers,Christian

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!When it came to Flite Sims, MS didn't quite compete on features and quality.There were two major companies for civil sims at first, MS and Sublogic. The latter had only 27 employees, Bruce Artwick being one of them. Bruce developed software to make it easier to control an aircraft from a keyboard, very handy cuz joysticks weren't as common. It was deliberately not copywrited, Sublogic believing the development of other sims would be in their long term interest. After hiring Bruce Artwick, MS copyrighted the software and sued. Sublogic finally caved in to an out of court settlement and gave up the rights to the name "Flight Simulator." Now everything is called something else except MS's version, what the hey, might as well copyriight the word "wheel" and make competing manufacturesr come up with names like "Circular transportation device".Sublogic's ATP was delayed, but still beat anything from MS for years after release. Sublogic is no more, the litigation could not have helped their bottom line.Competing on features and quality? How about giving just enough so no one thinks about putting a lot of capital into an alternative?Best Regards, Donny:-wave

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!$100 isn't excessive for high quality default planes and reasonable looking scenery/acurate navaids. I mean, personally I think of aircraft in terms of performance range, I am not all that interested in a Pilatus PCXII AND a TBM 700, or a Baron AND a Seneca... If the classes were covered, starting from cold and dark acurately including the frying of engines due to improper procedures, from GA to maybe a heavy plus few regional;s and commuters, at least if they were later released as freeware or subsequent "registered user gifts" from the company, $150 would NOT be too much.Me three, but PULEAAAASE ake the database easily updatable too, and an easy scenery editor if possible! In fact, I would RATHER have an easily updateable one than a 100% accurate static one. It'll be accurate much longer...Best Regards, Donny

>Just imagine, right now they may be reading this thread and thinking; >maybe we need to raise our game.They were thinking that before before you typed a letter. They are always upgrading the sim in house. It probably never ends...>How good is that?I guess I'll find out when the next version hits the streets...>I would say that's a result. But with a Monopoly......it's dead and >sluggish. With competition it's awesome.They have had, and may still have competition. Many have comeand gone, and there already is an open sim. "flight gear".Seems to me, you would be better off joining that team beingit's already in progress. You wanna develop a new sim from the ground up? All I can say is good luck. You will need it to avoid losing your shirtbefore it's all over. Seems to me the only chance to really succeed would be to develop a certain niche of the market. IE: Maybe cater to a more "pro" market, vs the more "game"aspect of MSFS. Even then, you will have your work cut out foryou. I have seen many competitors come, and most go since I first started with FS4 in 92. Few succeed, and you wanna know why?Cuz they plain can't catch up. MSFS is based on years and yearsof work overall, when you consider all the versions. Do you reallybelieve you can do it better? I really doubt it myself, unlessyou plan to devote many years to the project..Fancy aircraft skins don't make a sim. Myself, I have been fairlysatisified with the progress of MSFS all considering.I don't see where they are really slacking, except in maybe a fewobscure points. FS2004 *is* quite an improvement over FS2000. With all the add ons for MSFS, in a way, MS has competition from designers designing for their *own* product. When you see fancy new add ons, I'm sure MS does notice. And I imagine it does prodthem to raise their own internal bar a bit.If you think you can compete, and make a better product, more power to you. Again, good luck. You gonna need it to avoidflushing all that spent $$$$$ down the toilet. I've seen it happenbefore. Also, don't think that I'm trying to rain on your parade.I'm just a realist. And I have been involved with FS design, and do have a clue as to how things often work in that business. If you are really serious, you gotta load of work ahead of you and whoever signs up for this great adventure.MK

>> There is a reason MS is a billion dollar corporationCriminal techniques help to achieve this.>>they make good productsDo you really believe what you write here???>>Without Windows, DirectX, etc there is no Flight Simulator, there is no X-Plane, there is no Falcon 4.0 etcWe'd probably have another, better OS, and another FS...>>Bill Gates as a person gives more to charity than any human on the planetGreat, agree here. But we'll never know the true reason behind this...Person-without-a-name, peek a little farther from your bubble, some more practized criticism wouldn't harm you!Andreas

>Without Windows,>DirectX, etc there is no Flight Simulator, there is no>X-Plane, there is no Falcon 4.0 etc. As far as I know, X-Plane is developped on a Mac and Flightgear on Linux. Both not using Windows nor DirectX. But maybe not in your wintel world...Christian

CFS4 is canned

>(Paul,although my step son still asks why my name isn't on the >beta testers list LOL).I don't recall ever seeing a beta testers list anywhere clay, if there were one, it'd be a bloody long list!!!!http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

Thanks for the very detailed telling off. LOLTaking the moral high ground and school teacher approach is not my style. I like a more passionate reponse.If you have any skill you think can contribute why not contact me and I'll fill you in on some more specific private details.I wouldn't like to see you miss out on the opportunity just because of your current state of mind.I'm not project managing it. That part is taken care of as is the money side.What I'm interested in is really top developers. Can you contribute in this area? If so I won't hold anything negative you said against me and I'll offer you a proposition you won't want to say no to.

Too risky a venture to quit my job for (my assessment of the business opportunity here) or I'd consider it (and I don't have the age anymore where I can work 2 fulltime jobs side by side).

Paul, I think I once saw it in the manual -- or on something concerned with the 727 -- in any event, it was mentioned tongue in cheek, and I could care less. The important thing is we did it right!BestClayhttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...ers/Dopke01.jpgClayton T. Dopke (Clay)Major, USAF (retired)"Drac"

Well, there's right and there's righter - I know it's not real word but who gives a s**t!I spent 2 hours talking on skype with Werner last night (you gotta get skype Clay). It's great being able to set up a flight that's identical to the person on the end of the phone and then just send file changes back and forth to try and achieve what's needed........especially when the person on the phone parked his S27 yesterday evening :-)If Ron saw the changes being made to 'his' 727 air files he'd have a fit LOL!!!I'll email you a new 727 tonight :-)http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg