X-Planes big chance!

[RXP 2,338]

@Greazer

This is what I though that happened indeed, you thought you read me in a certain way which is not what I wrote:

Quote

I beg to differ: FS2020 has been implemented using an existing rendering engine, and existing FSX code base, and an existing Bing/Azure facility.

AN existing rendering engine doesn't mean THE FSX rendering engine, but it certainly means NOT from scratch, which is what I was answering to!

5 minutes ago, Greazer said:

from your original statement it seemed like [...] I think there is

The difference is that I know, because I see*, not because I suspect, or because I believe, and this is why I feel it is important to stay factual and why I'm sharing the facts and the knowledge!

 

---
*what is true though is that I see less and less, but it is still deeply rooted there behind. If you really want to go deep into 1 particular example about how much FSX code is rooted inside at the foundations of FS2020, and how much this is limiting 3rd party development, here is a detailed explanation about what I can see with its autopilot system that others can't:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/open-up-communications-with-reality-xp/392140/51?u=cptlucky8

 

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by RXP

[Greazer 1,320]

I don't think I was the only one who got confused by those statements. It was called absurd by other members.  That's fine, let's move on now 🙂

[RXP 2,338]

9 minutes ago, Greazer said:

That's fine, let's move on now 🙂

I'm fine too, don't worry no hard feelings at all!!

PS: I'd suggest you really read my post about the autopilot system even if you don't understand it all, because it shows a profound difference between the FS SDK and the XP SDK: the former was designed first and foremost for the sole needs of the in-house dev building the stock aircraft, and then sharing some bits and pieces to 3rd parties in the form of an SDK thinking "If this is good for us, this is good for them" whereas X-Plane SDK was built from the ground up for giving access to the raw low level of the core simulator system in a way meant for multiple plugins to share the resources. In other words, the latter SDK supports fully the "platform" paradigm in my opinion.

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by RXP

[Greazer 1,320]

The core of XP will always be it's strength IMO, and I like how they make available all these thousands of datarefs and let developers get creative.

[jarmstro 2,402]

While an interesting read all this tech stuff is completely irrelevant to the end user. All that matters is what they see on the screen and how it performs and plays. My wife couldn't care less about when the engine under the bonnet of her car was originally designed. In fact I doubt that she's ever even opened the bonnet. All she cares about is that it is fit for purpose having been updated, modified and modernised over the years.

[mSparks 2,086]

5 hours ago, jarmstro said:

......and see 80% of their PC market disappear in one fell swoop? In favour of the bug infested kernel inside Linux which requires you to have a degree in computer programming in order to get it to work?  It's got to be one of your most ludicrous statements my friend.😂Not going to happen.

Perhaps you missed it, but xp12 is going to be vulkan only (no opengl, and presumably no directX either), which already excludes it from 60 - 80% of windows PCs, the rest are stuck with xp11 or buying a new machine. So anyone who isnt on vulkan for xp11 wont be using xp12 without hardware/OS upgrades.

ie its already happening, they did mention they could do directx support a year or two back, but with MS stuff being so unreliable, such a small portion of their xp11 sales and huge portion of their support tickets its definately not a given, especially when windows users already have P3D and MSFS to keep them in their established windows flight sim happy place (aka frustrated and complaining while shelling out max $$$ for garbage that barely works).

 

 

[jarmstro 2,402]

40 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Perhaps you missed it, but xp12 is going to be vulkan only (no opengl, and presumably no directX either), which already excludes it from 60 - 80% of windows PCs, the rest are stuck with xp11 or buying a new machine. So anyone who isnt on vulkan for xp11 wont be using xp12 without hardware/OS upgrades.

ie its already happening, they did mention they could do directx support a year or two back, but with MS stuff being so unreliable, such a small portion of their xp11 sales and huge portion of their support tickets its definately not a given, especially when windows users already have P3D and MSFS to keep them in their established windows flight sim happy place (aka frustrated and complaining while shelling out max $$$ for garbage that barely works).

 

 

Nonsense I'm afraid. You know full well that the majority of current XP users are running Vulkan on a Windows PC. So what sense would there be in LR ditching windows support in XP12 and losing 80% of their customers as you suggested? Whether it's garbage or not is beside the point.

[Humpty 751]

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Perhaps you missed it, but xp12 is going to be vulkan only (no opengl, and presumably no directX either), which already excludes it from 60 - 80% of windows PCs, the rest are stuck with xp11 or buying a new machine. So anyone who isnt on vulkan for xp11 wont be using xp12 without hardware/OS upgrades.

ie its already happening, they did mention they could do directx support a year or two back, but with MS stuff being so unreliable, such a small portion of their xp11 sales and huge portion of their support tickets its definately not a given, especially when windows users already have P3D and MSFS to keep them in their established windows flight sim happy place (aka frustrated and complaining while shelling out max $$$ for garbage that barely works).

 

 

Lol ! hope you understand that Vulkan is multi platform and works in windows LOL , LR don't need DXxxxx for Windows now that they are on Vulkan , opengl was a different story. 

And why would anyone need to upgrade the PC for Vulkan to run ?  I am sure the current XP11 users are already on vulkan with decent systems , heck i can run vulkan on a 10 yrs old

[jcomm 5,939]

1 hour ago, Humpty said:

Lol ! hope you understand that Vulkan is multi platform and works in windows LOL , LR don't need DXxxxx for Windows now that they are on Vulkan , opengl was a different story. 

And why would anyone need to upgrade the PC for Vulkan to run ?  I am sure the current XP11 users are already on vulkan with decent systems , heck i can run vulkan on a 10 yrs old

That's because yar-a wooop woooop guy... 

[Humpty 751]

9 minutes ago, jcomm said:

That's because yar-a wooop woooop guy... 

yeah , choppas is all i want !

still on the fence with the UH1 , i think i will stick with the 412

Edited September 14, 2021 by Humpty

[mSparks 2,086]

2 hours ago, jarmstro said:

the majority of current XP users are running Vulkan on a Windows PC.

Sure, a small portion of the 20% ish of windows users with nvidia cards.

AMD has drivers but they VDL often

the other 60-65% of windows users have intel gpus that dont even have a vulkan driver.

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by mSparks

[jarmstro 2,402]

8 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Sure, a small portion of the 20% ish of windows users with nvidia cards.

AMD has drivers but they VDL often

the other 60-65% of windows users have intel gpus that dont even have a vulkan driver.

 

Twisted and misleading statistics. Have you considered a career in politics?

[mSparks 2,086]

2 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Twisted and misleading statistics. Have you considered a career in politics?

dont argue with my conclusion argue with how i reached it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/754557/worldwide-gpu-shipments-market-share-by-vendor/

[Humpty 751]

12 minutes ago, mSparks said:

dont argue with my conclusion argue with how i reached it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/754557/worldwide-gpu-shipments-market-share-by-vendor/

Fair enough , but have you considered that many are laptops and most don't bother asking for a discrete gpu in a laptop unless its specific ? and many are also used for work only where usually what comes with the board will suffice ?   most won't be stupid to use XP or any other game on  an onboard GPU. 

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by Humpty

[mSparks 2,086]

19 minutes ago, Humpty said:

Fair enough , but have you considered that many are laptops and most don't bother asking for a discrete gpu in a laptop unless its specific ? and many are also used for work only where usually what comes with the board will suffice ?   most won't be stupid to use XP or any other game on  an onboard GPU. 

 

sure, but all the gaming devices hitting the market are running linux not windows

e.g.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_Deck

and as someone else said, people dont care about the OS, they just want it to work (and by far the greatest portion of windows pcs dont and likely wont)

Edited September 14, 2021 by mSparks