Reality XP and Xplane 12

[Rylo 5]

Did RealityXP release updates to their GNS/GTN (750 and 530) that deliberately prevented those products from working with XP12, ostensibly so they could charge for updates? I've managed to get both the 750 and 530 working perfectly in XP12 by using old installer versions I had lying around, as discussed above. In fact, the 530 is graphically integrated perfectly into the 3D cockpit in several planes that only came out this year, like the TOGASIM v2 MU-2.

So why introduce a version check that prevents the installer from installing and the plugin from running in later versions of X-Plane, when the installer and the plugin both work perfectly fine with those later versions? The version check didn't exist until, as far as I can tell, 2019. 

If the reason was that RXP couldn't be sure the software would work with later versions of X-Plane, surely the prudent route would have been to alert the user that that version of XP (that the user was either trying to install into or use the plugin in) was unsupported and might not work properly or be unstable. 

Instead, it seems to me that updates were released that restricted and reduced the usability of the software without being of any benefit whatsoever to the end user.

I would have gladly paid $20 or whatever for an 'official' XP12 version that could have just been a re-branded version of the 2017 530 (which is what I'm using now and works perfectly). But the introduction of the version checks, without any explanation by RXP, followed by months of radio silence, have really put me off the product unless there is a reasonable explanation. 

Very much looking forward to hearing @RXP's position on this.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rylo

[Nils_93 2]

Answer to your question:

Important: This product is not compatible with X-Plane 12 beta;
X-Plane 12 is only in open beta test and is not officially released yet, nor its final SDK.

Source: https://reality-xp.com/index2.html#pricing 

Now, that statement obsolete as of yesterday, since X-Plane 12 came out of beta on the 20th of december. Just try to have some patience with the developer behind RXP, who needs to have a look at the SDK and its changes, before any changes necessary can be adapted. In the meantime, maybe try to not breach the TOS and just use the product for simulators it was intended and licensed for.

 

 

[Rylo 5]

8 minutes ago, Nils_93 said:

Answer to your question:

Important: This product is not compatible with X-Plane 12 beta;
X-Plane 12 is only in open beta test and is not officially released yet, nor its final SDK.

Source: https://reality-xp.com/index2.html#pricing 

Now, that statement obsolete as of yesterday, since X-Plane 12 came out of beta on the 20th of december. Just try to have some patience with the developer behind RXP, who needs to have a look at the SDK and its changes, before any changes necessary can be adapted. In the meantime, maybe try to not breach the TOS and just use the product for simulators it was intended and licensed for.

 

 

The trouble is, it absolutely is compatible with XP12 and has been since at least Beta 5. I've got more than 500 hours in XP12 with the 530 and 750, and both work brilliantly and they are from 2017 and 2018. 

RXP has known for many months that both are compatible because dozens of users have posted here that earlier versions work just fine. 

So, in effect you just parroted the same nonsense we've been hearing since August. 

Looking forward to hearing something substantive from @RXP and not having boilerplate statements that are demonstrably false pasted here.

Thanks.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rylo

[Nils_93 2]

1 minute ago, Rylo said:

The trouble is, it absolutely is compatible with XP12 and has been since at least Beta 5. 

Well, in that case you clearly know more than the dev does and also knew how the final SDK would look like way back at Beta 5. Thats quite a skill you got there.

Anyways, you purchased and licensed the tool(s) for a certain platform, XP12 is not one of them - end of story.

 

[Rylo 5]

47 minutes ago, Nils_93 said:

Well, in that case you clearly know more than the dev does and also knew how the final SDK would look like way back at Beta 5. Thats quite a skill you got there.

Anyways, you purchased and licensed the tool(s) for a certain platform, XP12 is not one of them - end of story.

 

You aren't really understanding this very well, are you?

This is not a complaint about a lack of XP12 compatibility; this has nothing to do with the SDK. The problem is that it appears that RXP sabotaged its own software so that its users couldn't use the software - that otherwise worked perfectly fine - with future versions of the simulator they bought the software for. The obvious reason RXP would do this is so RXP could charge said users for an upgrade. 

Read that until you understand that it has nothing whatsoever to do with Laminar's plans or the SDK or whatever laughable excuses you are trying to think of here - we are talking about a developer apparently inserting limitations that otherwise didn't exist into a product for the purposes of hamstringing it.

Suppose Apple released a phone that wasn't explicitly advertised or promoted as being 6G compatible, but then once 6G came out it turned out the phone worked with 6G just fine. Then, Apple released an update preventing the phone from working with 6G. There would be an outcry and Apple would get sued in multiple countries, certainly the US, in Europe, and in Australia. Go learn about consumer protection laws and consumer guarantees and do some research on how a court might construe a developer pushing out updates the practical result of which is to limit a product's functionality. Entitling customers to refunds would probably just be the start of it.

You can see, I hope, that this has nothing to with Apple predicting the future and everything to do with Apple pushing out updates to its users that quite literally break the functionality of their device. 

Your comments about the license/terms of service aren't even worth addressing. 

Good day.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rylo

[Nils_93 2]

So if it is so obvious to you, that RXP did this out of pure malintent, then what is the purpose of your post? You seem to have all the answer to your questions anyway, as wrong as they may be.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Nils_93

[Rylo 5]

20 minutes ago, Nils_93 said:

So if it is so obvious to you, that RXP did this out of pure malintent, then what is the purpose of your post? You seem to have all the answer to your questions anyway, as wrong as they may be.

Good sir, I first posted about this in August. 

I and the dozens of others in this thread have waited quite patiently for RXP to give us a substantive update. I have used RXP's software for more than 10 years. I have given them the benefit of the doubt. 

However, as you know, X-Plane 12 launched last week. And as somebody who has been using an old version of RXP just fine in XP12 since Beta5, you can understand that I find it very strange indeed to read RXP state that there are compatibility problems and that it's proving difficult to get it up and running in XP12. 

So, I figured that 4 months give or take is probably long enough to give a developer to write a short explanation explaining why they added the version check, or why they are telling us there are major compatibility issues when there apparently aren't, or why they wouldn't just let their customers decide if they're willing to try running the software on an unsupported platform instead of forcibly removing the ability to do so, or why they haven't released even a beta of RXP for XP12, or what the time frame is, etc.

These aren't unreasonable questions. They've been asked by different people for more than 4 months. I don't think many people would care if RXP hadn't removed the ability of the plugins to run in XP12, but the fact that they did understandably has people a bit frustrated. 

I am trying to get @RXP to respond. If he chooses not to, or replies as you have in ways that aren't satisfactory, then I think most people will take their future business elsewhere. However, he also might have a perfectly reasonable explanation for all this, in which case it's time we all hear it. But asking longingly into the abyss hasn't gotten us anywhere - it's time we were more direct.

If you can't understand that then I'm not sure I can communicate with you.

Peace.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rylo

[Rylo 5]

4 hours ago, Nils_93 said:

Well, in that case you clearly know more than the dev does and also knew how the final SDK would look like way back at Beta 5. Thats quite a skill you got there.

Anyways, you purchased and licensed the tool(s) for a certain platform, XP12 is not one of them - end of story.

 

Here's the EULA:

https://reality-xp.com/store/eulas/rxp-flightsim-eula.pdf

"Anyways, you purchased and licensed the tool(s) for a certain platform". 

There is nothing in the EULA purporting to make the copy of RXP 'platform specific'. 

The only part of this EULA that is even remotely relevant here is Clause 1.1.1: and you may copy the Software for archival purposes,’

In other words, I can back up my copies of the software - which is what I did.

All the best.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rylo

[Nils_93 2]

18 minutes ago, Rylo said:

However, as you know, X-Plane 12 launched last week. And as somebody who has been using an old version of RXP just fine in XP12 since Beta5, you can understand that I find it very strange indeed to read RXP state that there are compatibility problems and that it's proving difficult to get it up and running in XP12. 

It launched four days (96 hours) ago. Have some patience.

Also, just because a product works under beta, does not mean the next beta update won´t break things, like it did many times during the XP12 beta run. If you ever worked with a SDK, you´d very much understand the devs approach of not supporting a beta, where things are constantly being subject to change and being broken. FlyJSim CEO Jack / FlyingJackal for example publicly stated on their discord, that this was the first and last XPlane beta they supported, just to much additional stuff being broken by an ever changing enviroment.

<a href="https://ibb.co/pxgL4XN"><img src="https://i.ibb.co/pxgL4XN/ceo-flyjsim.png" alt="ceo-flyjsim" border="0"></a>

Alternate Link: https://ibb.co/pxgL4XN

Once any software is out of beta and into a first release candidate things might still change or contain bugs, of course, but drastic changes, requiring lots of re-work, are not as common. That is the main difference and most likely, why this dev decided to not support the beta.

As to why exactly Jean-Luc has decided to include a version check is a question only he could ever truly answer and frankly I doubt he will, non of the users business. All I can say from my own expertise working as a dev is, that licenses, such as the usage of the name "Garmin" and the look of the product is often limited by the contract, i.e. only for "Entertainment purposes", as seen in Lockheed Martin P3D, or to a certain user base, i.e. users of X-Plane 9, 10 & 11. If such clauses aren´t enforced by the licensee, penalties for breach of contract could end up being issued.

Maybe this allows you to better understand why its not as simple as adding the label of "Supports X-Plane 12" and call it a day. I am sure that RXP still wants to exist and grow as a business, so surely they will either have to start to support MSFS or XP12, as otherwise they´ll have nothing for current gen simulators in stock, and that isn´t something they´d want either.

So maybe do as I suggested, sit tight, enjoy christmas and maybe next time around there already is a new product, who knows.

[Rylo 5]

My good man, one minute you are copy pasting the RXP party line about how RXP is having XP12 compatibility issues (a demonstrably false claim and one that EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE has nothing whatsoever to do with why a developer would introduce new code into a product that BREAKS its ability to even run in the first place) and the next you're talking about contractual clauses with Garmin (which is something RXP could have said instead of claiming there were insuperable compatibility problems).

I will bow out of our conversation here and allow Jean-Luc to respond if he chooses.  

Merry Christmas good sir.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Rylo

[Nils_93 2]

4 hours ago, Rylo said:

and the next you're talking about contractual clauses with Garmin (which is something RXP could have said instead of claiming there were insuperable compatibility problems)

Not only do you not seem to understand, that this is a fictional aspect that was raised to better explain the matter to you, no, you also don´t understand that no dev ever is obliged to share such details with the customer - nor are they obliged to share their future plans with you. If Jean-Luc decides to sell play-doh effective tomorrow, you´ll have to live with it. Nowhere is or was xp12 compatibility promised. You got what you payed for, period. Just go and "take your future business elsewhere" if your unhappy. Oh wait, there is no other GTN650/750 for xp 12 - too bad.

[Matchstick 1,902]

3 hours ago, Nils_93 said:

Oh wait, there is no other GTN650/750 for xp 12 - too bad.

I'm hoping that will change.

[Rylo 5]

The website is now showing 'XP12' under all X-Plane Products - can anybody confirm that's the case? 

If there was a compatible version pushed out (for free) in the past 10 hours then:

1). I was completely wrong; and

2.) I have absolutely no idea why this wasn't communicated better to users, nor do I understand why the version checks were implemented. 

Nevertheless, if I was wrong (going to test now), then obviously I'll wear the egg on my face.

Edited December 22, 2022 by Rylo

[Rylo 5]

I can confirm that there is an update, it's free, and it's a native XP12 plugin. 

Therefore, I was 100% incorrect in my understanding of the situation and predictions that Jean-Luc would charge an upgrade. I was apparently also wrong about why version checks were introduced into the plugin.

I do wish communication had been better and I'm not sure why it wasn't, but I have seldom been so happy to be so wrong and I will change my username to reflect this.

Happy flying.  

-Wrong (formerly 'Rylo')

Edited December 22, 2022 by Wrong
Wrong

[Bruce gazoo Smith 0]

Question I have posted on other pages, I got xp12 to work with RXP 530/430, but not having much luck getting LPV approaches to work (Glide slope indicator showing US Flaged all the Time when LPV showing on the GNS) with x-plane 12 and RXP. Have tried going into plane maker and checking off SBAS equipment prent, but no change. Would anyone one here have any suggestions?
siming the Laminar B58 for an aircraft.