Dear PMDG - What does 64bit allow you to do that you couldn't before

[PMDG777 231]

43 minutes ago, sultanofswing said:

I for one would really like to see the Wing animations updated to not look like they are being animated at 24fps.  One thing I do like about X-Plane is there wing animations are extremely fluid and look just like the real deal.

Would you guys possibly be looking at that in the future?

Sean,

As Kyle touched on, I think the limit here is the animation limit in the P3D/FSX engine. I'm guessing that to save on some animation, they reduced the fluidity of the wing animations so that they could animate something more crucial on the flight deck.

[por930 51]

As Kyle says, the box just got a bit(lot) bigger. For many, this may be the difference between OOM after long flights. I see several of the developers now populating the airport interiors!!! As long as these developers provide a switch to turn off this candy, then great for those with lots of RAM and hope all their 64bit programs play by the same rules. Be interesting when the dust settles, how much of a change the 64 bit systems really do change the way we operate.

That said, if you managed to carry out long flights and did not suffer from OOM and happy to carry on with the same flight procedures etc, why change or upgrade platforms, and get sucked into the "must dump my FSX  and its a/c and get P3Dv4 and their a/c. 

[zmak 331]

6 hours ago, flyforever said:

Memory limitations, just like hard disk limitations at one time, forced many developers to be extremely efficient.

Now, some will be very sloppy. The extra features will only tax the cpu or gpu, which means that the cycle starts all over again.

tony

Your making the assumption that every one will convert to v4. That's not the case  at all. Devs will continue to pump out for 32 bit because that's where the masses are currently at. 

Zoran maksic 

[PMDG777 231]

10 minutes ago, Venturi said:

Your making the assumption that every one will convert to v4. That's not the case  at all. Devs will continue to pump out for 32 bit because that's where the masses are currently at. 

Zoran maksic 

Not strictly true, for example the Quality Wings 787 is not being released on P3Dv3. 64 bit only.

[zmak 331]

1 hour ago, PMDG777 said:

Not strictly true, for example the Quality Wings 787 is not being released on P3Dv3. 64 bit only.

Actually that will be a good test for numbers. Keeping an eye out for the following projects will be interesting 

[markdf 84]

3 hours ago, PMDG777 said:

Not strictly true, for example the Quality Wings 787 is not being released on P3Dv3. 64 bit only.

Hardly, their most recent statement said that they were releasing for FSX first, which is most definitely not 64 bit, 

[PMDG777 231]

1 minute ago, markdf said:

Hardly, their most recent statement said that they were releasing for FSX first, which is most definitely not 64 bit, 

I was talking about P3D platforms. Hence why I said it's not being released for P3Dv3.

[zmak 331]

14 minutes ago, markdf said:

Hardly, their most recent statement said that they were releasing for FSX first, which is most definitely not 64 bit, 

Well that changes everything. They are gambling on P3Dv3 users will automatically upgrade so they are out of the loop. They still recognize 32 bit numbers are big via fsx 

[markdf 84]

15 minutes ago, PMDG777 said:

I was talking about P3D platforms. Hence why I said it's not being released for P3Dv3.

Yes, in response to a post stating that developers wouldn't drop 32 bit in the near future. You're now selectively re-writing what you said to suit your argument

 

And aside from that, it's highly likely that the FSX version will work in v3 unless they take explicit action to block it from doing so.

[PMDG777 231]

13 minutes ago, markdf said:

Yes, in response to a post stating that developers wouldn't drop 32 bit in the near future. You're now selectively re-writing what you said to suit your argument

 

And aside from that, it's highly likely that the FSX version will work in v3 unless they take explicit action to block it from doing so.

Actually I was responding to the comment that developers will continue developing for 32bit platforms, I simply provided a case where this was not true. There was no argument, simply a statement showing that it wasn't always the case. The person I quoted did not state P3D or FSX, I simply pointed out that Quality Wings felt that developing for P3Dv3 would not be worth it. Nobody has selectively rewritten anything, I suggested rereading my original comment, I feel like you've grasped it wrongly. I never mentioned FSX, since this is a thread about 64 bit P3D anyway, you're the only person who has brought FSX into this.

Considering they're releasing P3D and FSX versions separately, as PMDG, FSLabs etc. do, I think it's safe to say that they will actively block it and it will take users trying to circumvent that (and subsequently complain when they have problems) to get it working in P3Dv3.

[markdf 84]

Just now, PMDG777 said:

Actually I was responding to the comment that developers will continue developing for 32bit platforms, I simply provided a case where this was not true. There was no argument, simply a statement showing that it wasn't always the case. The person I quoted did not state P3D or FSX, I simply pointed out that Quality Wings felt that developing for P3Dv3 would not be worth it. Nobody has selectively rewritten anything, I suggested rereading.

Considering they're releasing P3D and FSX versions separately, as PMDG, FSLabs etc. do, I think it's safe to say that they will actively block it and it will take users trying to circumvent that (and subsequently complain when they have problems) to get it working in P3Dv3.

But you didn't provide a case where it was not true, you provided a case where the initial release of the product was only for a 32 bit platform - pretty much the opposite of the statement you were trying to make.  The point about making seperate versions really doesn't apply either - if they're only releasing for P3Dv4 and not v3, then the FSX version cannot eat into the market share of their P3D platform (FSX build won't work on v4 and vice versa) therefore there's no business case for blocking it unless they do plan a P3Dv3 version to be sold separately.  In the cases of PMDG and FSLabs they were both trying to sell 32 bit versions on both platforms, so it made sense for them to block it so that they weren't competing with themselves. Not the same situation at all.

No company turns away paying customers unless it would canabalize the market share of their own products, it's far more likely that they're not bothering with a specific v3 release is because they don't need to.

[PMDG777 231]

Just now, markdf said:

But you didn't provide a case where it was not true, you provided a case where the initial release of the product was only for a 32 bit platform - pretty much the opposite of the statement you were trying to make.

This is a thread about P3D, not FSX. We are discussing P3D, not FSX. The P3D addon is being released for P3Dv4 only. The differences between P3Dv4 and FSX are on the way to X-plane and FSX, they are very very different now.

Just now, markdf said:

 The point about making seperate versions really doesn't apply either - if they're only releasing for P3Dv4 and not v3, then the FSX version cannot eat into the market share of their P3D platform (FSX build won't work on v4 and vice versa) therefore there's no business case for blocking it unless they do plan a P3Dv3 version to be sold separately.  In the cases of PMDG and FSLabs they were both trying to sell 32 bit versions on both platforms, so it made sense for them to block it so that they weren't competing with themselves. Not the same situation at all.

Actually it does apply. You clearly don't understand why PMDG, FSLabs and now QW have separate licenses for P3D and FSX. It has nothing to do with market share, it's everything to do with the license. P3D is professional level software, read the EULA. FSX is entertainment level software, read the EULA. You accept this when you purchase both the sim and the addon. PMDG have separate licenses because their products (being Boeing certified products) have different licenses for different sims.

Just now, markdf said:

No company turns away paying customers unless it would canabalize the market share of their own products, it's far more likely that they're not bothering with a specific v3 release is because they don't need to.

They're not bothering with P3Dv3 because they know that the extra effort required to make their product fully compatible with both v3 and v4 is not worth it. It's not a simple case of making an installer point to the new sim's folder, code has to be rewritten and recompiled to work with the different SDK, hence why the PMDG 737 is taking quite a bit longer than the 747, it is old code designed for P3D 32 bit and needs to be rewritten, recompiled, retested, rinse and repeat until no bugs. Further, QW staff are all part time with another full time job. PMDG has full time staff, hence has the extra resources, QW has to be efficient with the limited resources it has (staff, money etc.).

[markdf 84]

Just now, PMDG777 said:

This is a thread about P3D, not FSX. We are discussing P3D, not FSX. The P3D addon is being released for P3Dv4 only. The differences between P3Dv4 and FSX are on the way to X-plane and FSX, they are very very different now.

Actually it does apply. You clearly don't understand why PMDG, FSLabs and now QW have separate licenses for P3D and FSX. It has nothing to do with market share, it's everything to do with the license. P3D is professional level software, read the EULA. FSX is entertainment level software, read the EULA. You accept this when you purchase both the sim and the addon. PMDG have separate licenses because their products (being Boeing certified products) have different licenses for different sims.

They're not bothering with P3Dv3 because they know that the extra effort required to make their product fully compatible with both v3 and v4 is not worth it. It's not a simple case of making an installer point to the new sim's folder, code has to be rewritten and recompiled to work with the different SDK, hence why the PMDG 737 is taking quite a bit longer than the 747, it is old code designed for P3D 32 bit and needs to be rewritten, recompiled, retested, rinse and repeat until no bugs. Further, QW staff are all part time with another full time job. PMDG has full time staff, hence has the extra resources, QW has to be efficient with the limited resources it has (staff, money etc.).

I'm not getting into a EULA debate with you here, so I'm not touching that topic (and you shouldn't be either if you want to stay on the right side of the rules - the mods don't appreciate armchair lawyer-ing)

The discussion was specifically about changes in a 64 bit platform vs 32 bit ones, maybe you should read the thread title:

Dear PMDG - What does 64bit allow you to do that you couldn't before

The answer to which is nothing until they stop supporting 32bit versions, since they're bound by the lowest common denominator (or annoy all customers of 32 bit platforms by only releasing a limited feature version on those platforms)

 Anyhow since you're obviously privy to internal information on QW's internal decisions and reasoning - and clearly seem to be a programming expert (or you're just repeating what you've read about maintaining and porting code between different CPU architectures - my day job incidentally) I'm going to leave you to it and not waste time arguing with you.

[PMDG777 231]

13 minutes ago, markdf said:

I'm not getting into a EULA debate with you here, so I'm not touching that topic (and you shouldn't be either if you want to stay on the right side of the rules - the mods don't appreciate armchair lawyer-ing)

Nobody is armchair lawyering, I was pointing out the differences between PMDG's licenses between Boeing, LM and themselves, not LM's licenses to customers, the latter is the one that is not allowed. The end results of these licenses is why there are separate P3D and FSX licenses, and different customer EULA's.

13 minutes ago, markdf said:

The discussion was specifically about changes in a 64 bit platform vs 32 bit ones, maybe you should read the thread title:

The answer to which is nothing until they stop supporting 32bit versions, since they're bound by the lowest common denominator (or annoy all customers of 32 bit platforms by only releasing a limited feature version on those platforms)

Ah yes silly me I forgot that 64 bit FSX update that Microsoft released yesterday!

13 minutes ago, markdf said:

 Anyhow since you're obviously privy to internal information on QW's internal decisions and reasoning - and clearly seem to be a programming expert (or you're just repeating what you've read about maintaining and porting code between different CPU architectures - my day job incidentally) I'm going to leave you to it and not waste time arguing with you.

Now you're just being facetious.

Clearly I struck a nerve, someone is overly protective of their FSX install and is worried they'll miss out on a feature.

Back on topic to comparison of P3D 32bit and 64 bit.

[zmak 331]

36 minutes ago, PMDG777 said:

This is a thread about P3D, not FSX. We are discussing P3D, not FSX. The P3D addon is being released for P3Dv4 only. The differences between P3Dv4 and FSX are on the way to X-plane and FSX, they are very very different now.

Actually it does apply. You clearly don't understand why PMDG, FSLabs and now QW have separate licenses for P3D and FSX. It has nothing to do with market share, it's everything to do with the license. P3D is professional level software, read the EULA. FSX is entertainment level software, read the EULA. You accept this when you purchase both the sim and the addon. PMDG have separate licenses because their products (being Boeing certified products) have different licenses for different sims.

They're not bothering with P3Dv3 because they know that the extra effort required to make their product fully compatible with both v3 and v4 is not worth it. It's not a simple case of making an installer point to the new sim's folder, code has to be rewritten and recompiled to work with the different SDK, hence why the PMDG 737 is taking quite a bit longer than the 747, it is old code designed for P3D 32 bit and needs to be rewritten, recompiled, retested, rinse and repeat until no bugs. Further, QW staff are all part time with another full time job. PMDG has full time staff, hence has the extra resources, QW has to be efficient with the limited resources it has (staff, money etc.).

I think it's premature to say that quality wings are dropping 32 bit because its 'not worth it "

Crazy as it sounds, without the numbers 64bit could be dumped. 

The upgrade cost is big. Every one would love to have it but throwing $$$ at 64 bit and a PC upgrade when they already have a 32 bit  PC running smoothly will stop most. 

Supporting 64 bit and dumping 32 would be a massive gamble at this stage. 

I'm on the sidelines. I simply have real life priorities that will eat up the 1k needed. 

Interesting 12 months coming up