9 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Apart from the tone of that post (which is common both in this and in the MSFS forum), his point is not that far fetched, i.e. the sales ratio between XP and MSFS is likely greater than the budget ratio between them, hence XP might even be the most financially sustainable product of the two.

I agree, but the agenda is in the tone, not the content.  It's the general, automatic derogatory/deriding portrayal of any and all aspects of MSFS that characterizes all comments about MSFS from Sparks, Goran, flying_carpet and a few others here and has since the day I first appeared here, hence the 'cult' mentality of us against them, which is a large feature of cultism.  I honestly came to this forum to learn about XP12 way back when, never said a disparaging word about anything to do with Xplane, and in fact applauded elements of it from the start, and still do.  I am genuinely happy XP12 launched and hope it eventually exceeds all expectations.  In fact I posted those initial screenshots because some of the people here literally had not tried it yet so were depending at some level on the skewed analysis of people like Sparks, and as I was so impressed coming from FSX/P3d I truly just wanted to share.  Didn't go over well as you recall.

51 minutes ago, Noel said:

Here you go, I just read this from one of the frequent flyers here...this is absolute classic out of this forum.   Do you see the constant, recurrent derogatory analysis in this post, twising the poll into this? 

Well ... figures don't lie. Basically it's a simple rule of three, which every 3rd grad pupil can do.

 

4 minutes ago, Noel said:

I agree, but the agenda is in the tone, not the content.  It's the general, automatic derogatory/deriding portrayal of any and all aspects of MSFS that characterizes all comments about MSFS from Sparks, Goran, flying_carpet and a few others here and has since the day I first appeared here, hence the 'cult' mentality of us against them, which is a large feature of cultism.  I honestly came to this forum to learn about XP12 way back when, never said a disparaging word about anything to do with Xplane, and in fact applauded elements of it from the start, and still do.  I am genuinely happy XP12 launched and hope it eventually exceeds all expectations.  In fact I posted those initial screenshots because some of the people here literally had not tried it yet so were depending at some level on the skewed analysis of people like Sparks, and as I was so impressed coming from FSX/P3d I truly just wanted to share.  Didn't go over well as you recall.

???

 

 

🤣🤣 Oh ... now (after 3 wineglasses 🍷) I understand your weird humor. I wetted my pants ...

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

That's just making 3D scenery from OSM data, something we have had in X-Plane since Xplane 10 in 2011

https://developer.x-plane.com/2011/04/openstreetmap-and-x-plane-10/

Just in case you were wondering why no one here cares. It's old and not exciting.

 

Actually this is only partly true.  OSM is just one source for Blackshark.  It uses that where it exists and combines that with buildings extrapolated directly from the satellite imagery.  It does a really good job of this but as you can expect there are occasional misfires (some large boulders are turned into buildings) - these are pretty rare though and their learning algorithms keep getting better.

One thing that really helps in MSFS’s case is that the satellite textures of the roofs are mapped to the roofs of the AI buildings so you get authentic colors and details.

As was mentioned in another thread, Blacksharks data is planned to become available (with a license if i recall?) in the future.  I say this because the only reason I’m posting here is to suggest that this type of technology could be used to help improve XP12s already nice scenery much like W2XP did for XP11 in the past.  I did a lot of scenery dev in XP11 (for my own benefit alas because I was using licensed material from purchased scenery) and I do really love the XP SDK.  I totally agree with mSparks that it’s a great sim to tinker with.  Add that to some really clever people who make tools we can use for free (looking at you Tony W) and it can make scenery making a “hobby within a hobby”.

If we can put aside the sim vs sim nonsense and don’t always feel so “threatened” by each other - there is cool inspiration on both sides of the fence to take advantage of and make simming better all around.

Edited December 24, 20223 yr by VFXSimmer

2 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

If we can put aside the sim vs sim nonsense and don’t always feel so “threatened” by each other - there is cool inspiration on both sides of the fence to take advantage of and make simming better all around.

So, so true.

5 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

Well ... figures don't lie

As an MSc in economics, I can assure you they do. All-the-time.

Especially when you take anonymous descriptive statistics and begin the slippery slope journey to apply an accurate inferential hypothesis, trying to find a relationship between the variables presented in said anonymous multiple-take survey and apply it to all simmers.

I tell you its true name: It's called guesstimating. And it's baffling how many so called experts (irregardless field of work) confuse it with knowledge. 

I've seen some hilarious hot takes from both "sides" re: the 2022 Navigraph Survey. 

One conclusion we can make is that statistics was not a preferred subject in school for many simmers. 😉

45 minutes ago, Noel said:

any and all aspects of MSFS that characterizes all comments about MSFS from Sparks, Goran, flying_carpet and a few others here

At least 66.6% of the people you just referenced are pretty serious flight sim developers.... interesting you think you know better.

Virtually my entire income revolves around highly distributed multicore compute (not flight sim).

Windows doesn't have have support for multicore compute - if you try you will typically get error messages along the lines of:

which is why I don't have windows on any of my devices, and I am one of the 25% of flight simmers who have never flown MSFS.

But that doesn't stop people claiming MSFS can somehow do multicore better than X-Plane on an operating system that doesn't even have support for it... 🤷‍♂️

Yes, both of those may very well "skew" my opinion of MSFS.

Yes, you can now "hack it in", but its perf is nothing compared to what modern operating systems offer - #1 reason windows phone died a death.

51 minutes ago, Noel said:

and hope it eventually exceeds all expectations.

That's just it. It did already, as per the OP, biggest "news" in the survey, and the party hasn't even started yet, so here's to it continuing to exceed all expectations (and a Merry Christmas 🎄), finally a flight sim that did.

On 12/22/2022 at 3:36 PM, OverTheEDJ said:

Consistent with Steam’s current stats, this survey shows that there are a significant amount of XP11 users who have not upgraded to XP12, including me. While I am waiting for XP12 to mature and to see how strong the support is going forward; other than waiting for addon compatibility, I can’t think of additional reasons for holding off that would indicate that these XP11 holdouts will eventually upgrade.

It would be interesting to hear additional reasons why XP11 users have not upgraded to XP12.

In this case, it's important to remember that when this survey was taken, v12 was still deep in Beta.

Now that it's released and all that goes with that, the number of v11 upgrades will climb rapidly.

We just won't be able to see it in this survey until next Dec/Jan.

In the meantime, though skewed AND limited, we can watch real-time stats on Steam.

5 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Windows doesn't have have support for multicore compute - if you try you will typically get error messages along the lines of:

which is why I don't have windows on any of my devices, and I am one of the 25% of flight simmers who have never flown MSFS

Usually, it only takes one google search to find out sparksy is not telling the whole truth and a lot of times he's downright lieing

 

https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/cholera/vignettes/parallelization.html

 

The ‘cholera’ package supports parallelization of certain functions using the ‘parallel’ package, which is included in R’s base distribution. On macOS and Unix, this is done using parallel::mclapply(); on Windows, this is done using parallel::parLapply().

 

 

2 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

In the meantime, though skewed AND limited, we can watch real-time stats on Steam.

Sure, from day before yesterday:

MSFS:

XP12:

 

3 minutes ago, Kopteeni said:

The ‘cholera’ package supports parallelization of certain functions using the ‘parallel’ package, which is included in R’s base distribution. On macOS and Unix, this is done using parallel::mclapply(); on Windows, this is done using parallel::parLapply().

I said

11 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Yes, you can now "hack it in", but its perf is nothing compared to what modern operating systems offer - #1 reason windows phone died a death.

mclapply isn't supported because:

https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/parallel/versions/3.4.0/topics/mclapply

Quote

relies on forking and hence is not available on Windows unless

No OS support = no support.

I did take MSFS seriously for a few months, even looked at doing some P3D dev when it looked like I might have to get a windows box.

I didn't and don't.

4 minutes ago, Noel said:

Sure, from day before yesterday:

MSFS:

XP12:

 

I see that you're so utterly fixated on MSFS that you didn't even bother to read that I'm talking about X-PLANE v11 vs v12.

Kinda sad for you, but then it's fun to watch folks make fools of themselves...

1 minute ago, mSparks said:

I said

mclapply isn't supported because:

https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/parallel/versions/3.4.0/topics/mclapply

No OS support = no support.

I did take MSFS seriously for a few months, even looked at doing some P3D dev when it looked like I might have to get a windows box.

I didn't and don't.

What are you trying to prove by calling a function that has another implementation under a different name in the target OS and pasting the error message here?

4 minutes ago, Kopteeni said:

What are you trying to prove by calling a function that has another implementation under a different name in the target OS and pasting the error message here?

its not the same implementation, one uses forking and lets the OS handle everything based on decades of computer science research, the other doesn't because the OS doesnt include decades of computer science research, about the only thing you can be sure it includes is some chinese malware to steal all your secrets.

What are you trying to prove? cos I have some news for you, no quantity of screenshots of melted bridges, twisted smoke stacks and cartoon trees, let alone misquoting documentation I am a lot more familiar with than you is going to convince me MSFS is a good product, let alone touching windows with a ten foot pole. Ive long since moved on from that cess pit.

About the only thing you are proving is that I made all the right choices.

1 minute ago, mSparks said:

its not the same implementation, one uses forking and lets the OS handle everything based on decades of computer science research, the other doesn't because the OS doesnt include decades of computer science research, about the only thing you can be sure it includes is some chinese malware to steal all your secrets.

What are you trying to prove? cos I have some news for you, no quantity of screenshots of melted bridges, twisted smoke stacks and cartoon trees, let alone misquoting documentation I am a lot more familiar with than you is going to convince me MSFS is a good product, let alone touching windows with a ten foot pole. Ive long since moved on from that cess pit.

About the only thing you are proving is that I made all the right choices.

You refuse to use the correct function call for your target OS because somehow in your brain you see it as hacking and casually proceed to MSFS scenery errors. You are one of  a kind sparksy

14 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

I see that you're so utterly fixated on MSFS that you didn't even bother to read that I'm talking about X-PLANE v11 vs v12.

Kinda sad for you, but then it's fun to watch folks make fools of themselves...

Right on cue--so classic here.