4 hours ago, molleh said:

personally i find myself not using it much, simply because all i really use 90% of the time is pushback and i'd rather save system resources for other aspects of the sim.

gsx uses zero resources if you dont’t use it, and very little during pushback because, other than the very small impact of the pushback object itself, the entire logic runs outside the sim.

the only “impact” of having gsx installed would be on loading time becaise it adds lots of objects like an AI traffic pack, but it can be reduced if you disable Airport Services, which only affect the granularity of the operator selected for grounde services used by AI planes, not the one you call for gsx proper services.

8 hours ago, Tailwinds said:

 

I too was thinking of GSX but to be honest, I think it's had its day personally speaking.

Yeah I agree. It feels like the market is ripe for a new product that works in a more “modern” way - and has better support as well. 

4 hours ago, virtuali said:

gsx uses zero resources if you dont’t use it, and very little during pushback because, other than the very small impact of the pushback object itself, the entire logic runs outside the sim.

the only “impact” of having gsx installed would be on loading time becaise it adds lots of objects like an AI traffic pack, but it can be reduced if you disable Airport Services, which only affect the granularity of the operator selected for grounde services used by AI planes, not the one you call for gsx proper services.

Umberto create a dumbed down pushback product for casuals users - like pushback tool with a bit more bells and whistles - that Aerosoft version is pretty poor 

I have GSX but I would buy a nice just dedicated pushback software with some nice models - that would be great and people would buy it - GSX can be overwhelming for many

Just a thought - and of course for MSFS 2024 day one 🙂 and would be easy for you and your talents 

Edited February 5, 20251 yr by Richard Sennett

11 hours ago, JonathanC said:

and has better support as well. 

Respectfully pointing to the update history:

https://www.fsdreamteam.com/couatl_liveupdate_notes.html

Starting only from August 2022 (where GSX Pro came out), and counting ONLY the items flagged as "NEW" (excluding all changes and fixes", we had about 300 NEW Features being added. Now sure if there's anything else out there with a better support.

 

Quote

It feels like the market is ripe for a new product that works in a more “modern” way 

Not sure what you mean with "modern", but we are working on a new way to interact with it in MSFS 2024, which should improve quite a bit over the limitations of the standard Toolbar menu items.

Also, note that GSX Pro is designed to also be remotely controlled by 3rd party developers ( see what Fenix, Leonardo and Fs Labs did, and several others will follow shortly, like the new iniBuilds A350 which will show their implementation soon ), but in a way that even if we add features or services, they won't have to change much in their code and in some case nothing at all.

Ideally, the GSX menu (which will be improved in MSFS 2024 anyway), should be the "fallback" way to interact with it, with Remote Control from the airplane being the primary way.

7 hours ago, Richard Sennett said:

Umberto create a dumbed down pushback product for casuals users - like pushback tool with a bit more bells and whistles - that Aerosoft version is pretty poor 

All these tools are limited because they rely too much on default MSFS behaviors, so each time there's a change or a problem, they inherit the problem as well.

GSX strength is that uses its own custom engine for almost everything, for vehicle movements, animations, pathfinding, pushback IK math and even the overall language interpreter that runs its code (a custom Python interpreter) that runs outside the sim, which is beneficial for the lower impact on the system (instead of a large Javascript or WASM of JS+WASM code that runs on the MSFS Main thread, we have a separate .exe that has its own completely separate and lightweight threads), but having a separate code interpreter for each supported simulator, means we can use the very latest Simconnect SDK for each sim, making it a native application, with the bulk of the GSX code mostly unaffected by changes in the simulator.

That's why we could release GSX Pro for MSFS 2024 when it was still in Alpha version, so we were ready on release on day 1, while other developers that relied more on default systems like JS or WASM have been more affected by issues in those systems without any way to fix them on their side. I think Fenix enjoyed a similar advantage, since they could also release their A320 line as quickly as possible for MSFS 2024, because they also have a lot of custom systems that are not so much affected by changes/issues in the sim.

Yes, of course the downside of all of this, is GSX Pro can't be released on the MS Marketplace and the Xbox (same as Fenix, FS Labs or Leonardo), and that's a bummer for financial reasons, but the problem is that making a "dumb" version of GSX for these users, would likely require a rewrite from scratch and while this can be done, it will be at the expense of adding new important features to the "real" version, and to all users who trusted us expecting a constant flow of updates for the whole product life.

For airliners, the resounding answer is YES! Otherwise, I have it disabled via addon-linker. Meaning it doesn't need to load every time I load the sim.

Based one the last few posts, I wonder if some simmers actually understand the value or how to use GSX Pro.

 

1 hour ago, CFIJose said:

Based one the last few posts, I wonder if some simmers actually understand the value or how to use GSX Pro.

If the majority of the user base doesn’t understand the program, you can either educate the user base or make the program simpler. 
 

Choosing to be abrasive with users and fighting with them, while at the same time making the program progressively more complicated and buggy leads to where you are today. 

27 minutes ago, JonathanC said:

If the majority of the user base doesn’t understand the program, you can either educate the user base or make the program simpler. 
 

Choosing to be abrasive with users and fighting with them, while at the same time making the program progressively more complicated and buggy leads to where you are today. 

I disagree! GSX Pro is very stable and easy to use. All it takes is to watch a few YT videos.

If you enjoy flying Airliners and want realism, GSX is an essential addon. If you don't, then it's not needed. The user needs to take the time to at least watch a few YT videos. That's the important point.

1 hour ago, CFIJose said:

The user needs to take the time to at least watch a few YT videos. That's the important point.

Sure, I’m not disagreeing with you. 

I got GSX Pro after buying the FSL A321. Everything is integrated with the MCDU/ACARS and triggered by switches in the aircraft. You never see the GSX menu.

It all feels natural and the immersion you get from the vehicles and ground crew whizzing around servicing and loading the aircraft is worth every penny.

 

2 hours ago, JonathanC said:

If the majority of the user base doesn’t understand the program, you can either educate the user base or make the program simpler. 

I think you misunderstood who was replying to you, it was another user!

 

2 hours ago, JonathanC said:

while at the same time making the program progressively more complicated and buggy leads to where you are today. 

Where are we, today ?

A program that is clearly way less buggy that it used to be when it initially came out (and lots of so called "bugs" were caused by not having full access to the airport data due to the lack of the Navdata API, which was introduced only with SU10 to make it work with all airports and improved to include Jetway data only with SU12), and at the same time has way more features than 2 years ago.

 

Edited February 5, 20251 yr by virtuali

3 hours ago, JonathanC said:

If the majority of the user base doesn’t understand the program, you can either educate the user base or make the program simpler. 
 

Choosing to be abrasive with users and fighting with them, while at the same time making the program progressively more complicated and buggy leads to where you are today. 

Only bugs I have encountered were 1.  Loading weights into PMDG CDU which was resolved and 2.  Issues with certain liveries after "GSX added animated walking passengers through the jetway and seated in the plane"   If that's making things more complicated I will take it.

So yes, when you add functionality we have never seen before in any flight simulator there are sometimes hiccups but Umberto is actually one of the most responsive dev's out there.   I just personally don't like the shift to Discord but understand it's better and easier for him.   

Other than that in all the YEARS I have used it in both P3D and now in MSFS it's always been pretty rock solid.

This was last week when it was -2 at Newark with freezing rain and de-icing

and then pushing back from gate 102 at KEWR which involves a push, 180 degree turn and then pull to the final hold spot.  

Executed perfectly with wing walkers as well...

 

3 hours ago, JonathanC said:

If the majority of the user base doesn’t understand the program, you can either educate the user base or make the program simpler. 

The manual is one of the most comprehensive I've seen which goes especially out of it's way to answer even the most mundane questions (Even for devs looking to integrate). There is not anything in the manual that hasn't gone unanswered with regards to how GSX functions as-well as it's limitations and how to mitigate them. I could not see how the Umberto can further educate people when he provides the very document that does so.

Though it's common place that simmers don't often read the manual and getting frustrated that it's not plug n play hence the meme-worthy "RTFM". Which is particularly ironic considering we're all here taking the time to learn multi-million dollar planes and I don't see anyone complaining of them to be too hard to learn.

Edited February 5, 20251 yr by Lucky38i

The manual is, indeed, excellent and GSX is quite a powerful and capable and very well supported product that brings a lot of different features. But I think what some are asking for is a product that brings less to the table, that is simpler, both in scope and complexity, and lighter, especially considering how many objects it loads into the simulator which in 2020 used to add over 2 minutes to my loading time.  I kind of get this because I don't really want all of the integration and all the components of ground operation simulated. It's immersion is kind of a double-edged sword to me because at this point I find the highly scripted nature of the flows unrealistic and while sometimes I appreciate seeing people out moving around, just as many times I look at their mechanical, repetitive actions and it breaks my immersion.

So if there was a simple product that just competently handled pushback I would likely used that over GSX, as my imagination can fill in the rest of what is going on. For me MSFS is still a flight simulator, and I do not need to extend that to ground operations to enjoy it. Also I fly more GA/Corporate flights now and for those a simpler pushback would be much appreciated. GSX is just overkill for that.

Edited February 5, 20251 yr by Cognita

1 hour ago, Lucky38i said:

I could not see how the Umberto can further educate people when he provides the very document that does so.

Well, then this is the issue. Maybe most people cannot be further educated and his product will remain relevant only to a small niche of users. That's fine, there are many very niche products aimed at a specific industry/user/job function etc, and the developer can make a good living doing just that. 

Anyway, I don't mean to continue on, I just expressed a wish that someone would make a better tool, and immediately got piled on by the developer and others telling me how this is the epitome of perfection and thus my wish is unnecessary since we already have everything we need. 

In that case, I wish you and the other users of GSX Pro good luck and much enjoyment with this product that apparently is all things to all people and can do no wrong.