37 minutes ago, mSparks said:

They are using native code signed and distributed by Microsoft so it can run on XBOX and XBOX PC.

WASM is so 3rd party developers can make addons that will run on XBOX and XBOX PC without getting the code signed by Microsoft - hence no file or system access.

How do you know all this? Are you on the alpha team and do you have access to the sdk? Ms said they are developing this sim for the community so to give us a half word not allowed system would be insufficient. I'll wait to see what Asobo has to say about this. 

3 minutes ago, devgrp said:

How do you know all this? Are you on the alpha team and do you have access to the sdk? Ms said they are developing this sim for the community so to give us a half word not allowed system would be insufficient. I'll wait to see what Asobo has to say about this. 

Because I've been developing for roughly 25 years, lead for 15 of those, and its the only reason that they would choose wasm over a native sdk similar to xplm or simconnect, its otherwise inferior in every way.

25 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Because I've been developing for roughly 25 years, lead for 15 of those, and its the only reason that they would choose wasm over a native sdk similar to xplm or simconnect, its otherwise inferior in every way.

Last I heard simconnect was being supported. No offense but I'll wait to see what Asobo has to say 

4 minutes ago, devgrp said:

Last I heard simconnect was being supported. No offense but I'll wait to see what Asobo has to say 

Asobo said

On 3/13/2020 at 7:40 AM, domkle said:

We also made lots of progress on WebAssembly support, which is the technology that will allow the porting of native code to our platform.

You just simply do not need, nor would you ever want to "port native to wasm" if the platform supported native code.

Microsofts two platforms that do no support 3rd party native code are XBOX and XBOX PC.

Edited April 7, 20206 yr by mSparks

3 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Asobo said

You just simply do not need, nor would you ever want to "port native to wasm" if the platform supported native code.

Microsofts two platforms that do no support 3rd party native code are XBOX and XBOX PC.

Regardless of what was said and what tools are available, the issue at hand is not being able to do complex avionics. One person said we can't do synthetic vision and another pointed out that Asobo posted about this in the dev forum. Personally I don't care about the underlying working. As long as we have study level addons, I'll be good 

Asobo is working on Webassembly.  A lot of people assume that they are just dumping a browser version of Webassembly in the Sim.  If they did, why would they say they made progress on it?  They would just say that it will soon be in the build.

So if they are working on it, perhaps they are working on the limitations.  As pointed out, there is no reason they can't expand the API.

Here is something from the Webassembly FAQ.  "Will I be able to access proprietary platform APIs (e.g. Android / iOS)?
Yes but it will depend on the WebAssembly embedder. Inside a browser you’ll get access to the same HTML5 and other browser-specific APIs which are also accessible through regular JavaScript. However, if a wasm VM is provided as an “app execution platform” by a specific vendor, it might provide access to proprietary platform-specific APIs of e.g. Android / iOS." 

32 minutes ago, devgrp said:

able to do complex avionics. One person said we can't do synthetic vision and another pointed out that Asobo posted about this in the dev forum. Personally I don't care about the underlying working. As long as we have study level addons, I'll be good 

This is because WASM realistically only supports a single thread, and a tiny subset of the hardware features required for things like complex avionics.

Using a car analogy, WASM based plugins in the current sim market would be like trying to compete in formula one using a go kart made by a 15 year old.

Which is why the devs are not particularily happy.

It is actually an improvement from what I initially expected, because, being an XBOX and XBOX PC game, I wasn't expecting any support for 3rd party native code.

22 minutes ago, GlideBy said:

If they did, why would they say they made progress on it?

Because they still have to integrate it, which is a mission in and of itself. Not to mention [help] develop an entire tool chain to actually test and debug it while the sim is running, since non of the existing tools will work.

Coming back to the above car analogy, they are trying to provide a means to compete in formula one, and all they have right now is a 1970s go kart engine, a wrench, and some pieces of steal.

Now you know why there's an NDA.

 

Edited April 7, 20206 yr by mSparks

The jamming-to-signal ratio in this thread is so high, I don't know how anyone can take anything meaningful away.

As a novice programmer, it just doesn't pass the smell test that aircraft creation as we know it is over. It doesn't match what Asobo/MS have said. It doesn't match how folks like PMDG have positioned themselves. And it doesn't match the expectations of the user base.

I could be wrong, but the speculative protestations of a few vociferous individuals with no meaningful knowledge of Asobo/MS intentions and a demonstrable anti-MS bias do not make a persuasive argument.

Looks like we'll just have to wait for actual facts.

Personally I hope Asobo tackle this issue and explain what the exact purpose of Webassembly is within the sim  and summarise why they are intending using it when so many developers seem against it. 

1 hour ago, Noodle said:

It doesn't match what Asobo/MS have said.

You're forgetting that the Microsoft bean counter 🤑 has the last say, it's his (Microsoft's) money that Asobo is spending.

Devs, with access to the alpha, have posted in this thread that Asobo has not delivered on their promises for 3rd party SDK support in FS2020.

That does not bode well.  Sure tell me it's "an alpha" and how your wish fairy is going to make everything better, and when you awake from your dream let me know.

Asobo might care about support for complex aircraft but that Microsoft bean counter's idea of 3rd party add-ons is to have "devs" whip out simple aircraft and liveries for the Xbox kiddies to spend their pocket money and gift cards on.

All IMHO of course.

I'm looking forward to FS2020 for bush flying and GA sightseeing but I have trouble believing, given the current developer discontent, that study-level aircraft (like PMDG) are coming to FS2020 anytime soon, if ever.

Edited April 7, 20206 yr by MatthewS

26 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Microsoft bean counter 🤑 

...has not delivered on their promises for 3rd party SDK support in FS2020.

...your wish fairy is going to make everything better

...when you awake from your dream let me know.

...Microsoft bean counter's

...Xbox kiddies

All IMHO of course.

Cease Buzzer.

The entire post is needlessly condescending, speculative, and baseless. It lowers everyone's SA and devalues your opinion.

Asobo/MS have not "promised" anything. They have, however, communicated their desire and intent. The fact that something is not presently in an early Alpha build of the software is not an indicator of...anything. 

On the other hand, a major developer such as PMDG--which is run by a guy who has been critical of MS in the past, and whose financial future is tied inextricably to producing high-end complex aircraft addons--has publically decided to align itself to MSFS at the expense of XP development. That IS an indicator of...something.

If PMDG comes out and announces a change of heart, citing an inability to produce high-fidelity avionics, then I'll be disappointed and your pessimism will have been justified.

In the interim, I choose to exercise some common sense with a dash optimism.

24 minutes ago, Noodle said:

Asobo/MS have not "promised" anything. They have, however, communicated their desire and intent.

Sure... you can play semantics but where I come from we call that a promise (or implicit ""memorandum" of understanding" if you prefer).. You know, so parties can get on with their respective work in good faith the other will deliver.

 

24 minutes ago, Noodle said:

On the other hand, a major developer such as PMDG--which is run by a guy who has been critical of MS in the past, and whose financial future is tied inextricably to producing high-end complex aircraft addons--has publically decided to align itself to MSFS at the expense of XP development. That IS an indicator of...something.

That was months ago, read this thread, what was promised has not been followed through on according to devs with access to the alpha.... What's PMDG's current stance on the viability of FS2020 for their financial future?

Edited April 7, 20206 yr by MatthewS

15 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

That was months ago, read this thread, what was promised has not been followed through on according to devs with access to the alpha.... What's PMDG's current stance on the viability of FS2020 for their financial future?

Until PMDG issue a statement that they've changed their business plan, one has to assume they are content with how MSFS is currently being developed, and that PMDG believe that MSFS is where their future lies.

In other news P3D v5 FINALLY has volumetric clouds. Took them long enough. Things are finally looking good, I can go Flight Sim, or P3Dv5, because they finally deliver a weather system that works.

I want to hear nobody complaining in here anymore because we have options people!

10 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Sure... you can play semantics but where I come from we call that a promise (or implicit ""memorandum" of understanding" if you prefer)..

 

That was months ago...what's PMDG's current stance on the viability of FS2020 for their financial future?

The difference is hardly semantic. You'll have to warm up your Google-fingers if you need an explanation of what constitutes a "memorandum of understanding".

Regarding PMDG's current stance, easy: their public position on the viability of MSFS (NOT FS2020) for their financial future is EXACTLY the same as it was when they announced their intentions several months ago.

Have you heard any differently?