1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

And they've not had the decision to change their approach (languages, framework etc.) to what everyone else does who seemingly has no problem to get a working EFB into their airplane (Maddog, Fenix, FBW, Aerosoft etc.)?

They could either

A) Keep their existing aircraft in WASM and find a way to make EFB functions like Navigraph and Simbrief work via a work around, in which case they can release and develop aircraft simultaneously to developing the EFB, or

B) Rewrite their existing aircraft in another language to better facilitate the EFB implementation, but hold up release and development of aircraft for years, make losses and anger the customers.

Why would anyone choose B? In other words, why would anyone literally prioritize an EFB over an entire aircraft line up?

I think PMDG should just ignore these updates and just release their products when they are done. Because every update seems to trigger people. 

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by RobJC

2 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

With the exception of Maddog. Fenix, FBW and Aerosoft all have JS EFBs with WASM-based systems ( I know what you're going to say about Fenix,

I’m not able to say how Fenix does it. Obviously you can speak directly for FBW.

I can say for sure that the EFB in the current Aerosoft CRJ is 100 percent WASM, as I am a beta tester for that product. Hans Hartmann develops exclusively and only in C++/WASM. I recently asked him in our private Beta Discord if there was any JS in the ATR he developed for Asobo, and he confirmed that it is all WASM.

The present CRJ EFB, which the aircraft has had since initial release, is “basic”. It is used for setting aircraft options, selecting panel states, loading fuel and payload etc. There is a CRJ update in the works which among other things will add full SimBrief and Navigraph support. I’m pretty sure Hans has been patiently waiting for the introduction of full TCP/IP functionality in WASM to proceed with adding that feature, as I know he has no interest in “doing” JS.

There is certainly nothing wrong with JS as a development language. All of the default MSFS aircraft are written in JS, and as Working Title (and you folks at FBW) have shown,  it is certainly possible to create extremely complex aircraft systems, graphics and avionics in JS to rival anything that could be done in C++, albeit with somewhat slower execution speed in some areas.

But, PMDG is, and always has been a C++ house. Their MSFS 737 is 100 percent WASM and all of their previous products for FSX and P3D were developed in C++. Robert at PMDG somewhat disparagingly refers to JS as a “scripting language” which is not really an accurate description, but it probably shows he is not very comfortable in using it, and was only doing so out of necessity.

I can somewhat understand his point of view. I am not an aircraft developer for any sim, but I do have a strong background in C++ and (especially) pure C - specifically in embedded systems. At age 67 I am too old a dog to learn new tricks.

I still strongly a suspect that PMDG is going to drop whatever JS they have been using in the EFB in favor of pure WASM. Though I have no direct evidence, it’s quite possible that the EFB UI and all functions not requiring external access were already coded in WASM, with JS only being used for the backend TCP/IP bridge between JS and WASM. 

Or maybe they coded the whole EFB in JS. I guess we’ll know one way or another  when it is finally released.

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by JRBarrett

As strange as it may be, I can see the PMDG EFB being a sort of make-or-break situation for the company. They have, and as many people have mentioned, taken a considerable amount of time to produce this feature. The fact that there has been this much discussion and hype regarding the tablet, what happens if it releases and it's just a sort of bland version of an EFB? What if it's devoid of any new innovation? After all this time, it is possible that what they release leaves much to be desired. Many people would see this as proof to their argument that PMDG has lost its "shine". On the flip side, maybe they are taking all this time to produce something truly amazing with features we haven't seen in any of sim EFB. It's possible we'll all say: "ah, thats why it's taken this much time to produce". 

Either of these results will allow people on both sides to say that they were right. So, when I say that this could be a make-or-break situation for PMDG, I certainly hope it's a home run, because we all would benefit from it. 

15 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

Or maybe they coded the whole EFB in JS. I guess we’ll know one way or another  when it is finally released

I stand corrected on Aerosoft, thanks for that clarification and interesting insight on Hans and his process.

for the rest of what you said I wholeheartedly agree with your perspective and was succinctly put. I enjoyed the conversation.
 

IMO while PMDG has always been a C++ house, it can be advantageous to have a multi-language project rather than shoehorn one language to do it at all. However, that’s worked well for them in the past, so who knows for the future. I don’t think PMDG will scrap their JS implementation as they’ve probably made some useful discoveries from the language and its paradigms. Regardless, we shall see in due time.

2 minutes ago, Bdub22 said:

As strange as it may be, I can see the PMDG EFB being a sort of make-or-break situation for the company. They have, and as many people have mentioned, taken a considerable amount of time to produce this feature. The fact that there has been this much discussion and hype regarding the tablet, what happens if it releases and it's just a sort of bland version of an EFB? What if it's devoid of any new innovation? After all this time, it is possible that what they release leaves much to be desired. Many people would see this as proof to their argument that PMDG has lost its "shine". On the flip side, maybe they are taking all this time to produce something truly amazing with features we haven't seen in any of sim EFB. It's possible we'll all say: "ah, thats why it's taken this much time to produce". 

Either of these results will allow people on both sides to say that they were right. So, when I say that this could be a make-or-break situation for PMDG, I certainly hope it's a home run, because we all would benefit from it. 

On the other hand, it would be a mistake to make the PMDG aircraft primarily an “EFB Simulator” with the aircraft part taking second place.

Real aircraft EFBs don’t do “everything”. I currently work for a corporate aircraft operator. We have three Bombardier CJR-200s and three Dassault Falcon 900 EASy aircraft. Each pilot is issued an iPad Pro which are FAA-approved by our local FSDO for use as an EFB. They are each equipped with Foreflight with full worldwide Jeppesen charts, and an app for for filing flight plans and doing aircraft-specific performance calculations via ArincDirect - (which is a Collins Aerospace subscription service for professional aviation).

The units have internet access on the ground via cellular, and in the air (above 10,000 feet) via GoGo ATG over aircraft WiFi. Other than Foreflight and ArincDirect, the EFBs don’t really do anything else.

The pilots can also use the EFBs to send and receive email and SMS texts like  any other IOS tablet.

The aircraft all have the ability to fetch ArincDirect flight plans, but that is done via ACARS using the FMS, not the EFBs.

It’s different in a flight sim of course. I would expect the upcoming EFB to have the ability to select various aircraft options previously accessed by by FMS menus, the ability to load fuel and payload and calculate CG, a runway-specific takeoff and landing performance calculator, and of course the ability to load flight plans from Simbrief and charts from Navigraph.

For me personally, I probably would never use the Navigraph charts in-sim, as I also have an iPad equipped with Foreflight Pro and the Navigraph charts app. I prefer to have the charts on a real physical EFB that I can hold in my hand.

But, I can certainly understand that in-sim charts are important to many MSFS users - especially those who fly exclusively in VR.

 

6 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

On the other hand, it would be a mistake to make the PMDG aircraft primarily an “EFB Simulator” with the aircraft part taking second place.

I completely agree and I never meant to say that PMDG's EFB will be a make-or-break for future planes. Their reputation is secure in that regard. They make great planes and a great product. I was purely speaking to the EFB alone and that amount of discussion around it and the time it has taken to produce. I certainly want them to succeed and I hope their tablet is a home run. I was only saying that after all this time and it turns out to be a dud, that will hurt their reputation. 

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by Bdub22

I think the entire thing has been poorly handled from PMDG. They should have just said there will be no EFB in the 737's at this time, we are working on it for the 777 and may bring it over to the 737.  Then they should have listed the countless airlines flying the 737 around the world that don't even use one and that should have been it.  I don't understand what the big deal is, I can get my flight plan into the FMC, sometimes I type it in manually, the plane flies like a dream with the A/P  or without, I just enjoy flying it.  

4 minutes ago, MarkW said:

I think the entire thing has been poorly handled from PMDG. They should have just said there will be no EFB in the 737's at this time, we are working on it for the 777 and may bring it over to the 737.  Then they should have listed the countless airlines flying the 737 around the world that don't even use one and that should have been it.  I don't understand what the big deal is, I can get my flight plan into the FMC, sometimes I type it in manually, the plane flies like a dream with the A/P  or without, I just enjoy flying it.  

To me the EFB in the 737 is about as useful as a bicycle for a fish. As you stated, the 737 is a joy to fly. 

1 hour ago, JRBarrett said:

But, PMDG is, and always has been a C++ house. Their MSFS 737 is 100 percent WASM and all of their previous products for FSX and P3D were developed in C++. Robert at PMDG somewhat disparagingly refers to JS as a “scripting language” which is not really an accurate description, but it probably shows he is not very comfortable in using it, and was only doing so out of necessity.

Let's simplify this whole topic. AIUI, PMDG took a gamble on continuing to write in a language that didn't do everything they wanted it to do in MSFS.

Rather than bring in someone at the start to support the team transition to using a new multi-language development process at the start, or call a halt to proceeding down the same path and transition, they continued to invest a lot of resource into this serialiser/deserialiser, which (thanks to Asobo) has now been made redundant.

So the gamble didn't pay off. They've spent way too long getting to where they are now, and now a lot of people are frustrated with them.

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by F737MAX

1 minute ago, Bobsk8 said:

To me the EFB in the 737 is about as useful as a bicycle for a fish. 

That's exactly the kind of talk you get from people who still think analogue gauges are preferable to glass cockpits.

4 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

So the gamble didn't pay off. They've spent way too long getting to where they are now, and now a lot of people are frustrated with them.

Can’t think of a better summation concerning the whole PMDG saga.  And before you start to throw shade at me, I’ve been a PMDG customer for almost 20 years (FSX, P3d, MSFS2020) and I can honestly say I have purchased every plane in their portfolio with the exception of the DC-6 for P3d (I have the MSFS version).  It would also not be a stretch to say over those years I have invested hundreds and hundreds of dollars in their products and continue to do so even today, but that does not in any way negate the giant gap PMDG has managed to create with current customers including long term and loyal ones like me.

RR would do well to do some self reflection also and perhaps leave customer communication to someone else as for now he’s only batting about 100 in my POV

-B

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

To me the EFB in the 737 is about as useful as a bicycle for a fish. As you stated, the 737 is a joy to fly. 

Useful for take off especially with airports who use intersections quite a bit, selected temperatures which airlines use a lot. Landing distance is a handy feature. List goes on....

5 hours ago, Bdub22 said:

As strange as it may be, I can see the PMDG EFB being a sort of make-or-break situation for the company. 

This better be the best EFB in the industry or they're going to get scorched all over the internet. 

6 hours ago, Bdub22 said:

As strange as it may be, I can see the PMDG EFB being a sort of make-or-break situation for the company. They have, and as many people have mentioned, taken a considerable amount of time to produce this feature. The fact that there has been this much discussion and hype regarding the tablet, what happens if it releases and it's just a sort of bland version of an EFB? What if it's devoid of any new innovation? After all this time, it is possible that what they release leaves much to be desired. Many people would see this as proof to their argument that PMDG has lost its "shine". On the flip side, maybe they are taking all this time to produce something truly amazing with features we haven't seen in any of sim EFB. It's possible we'll all say: "ah, thats why it's taken this much time to produce". 

Either of these results will allow people on both sides to say that they were right. So, when I say that this could be a make-or-break situation for PMDG, I certainly hope it's a home run, because we all would benefit from it. 

The time that it has taken has nothing to do with any new innovation that an end user would notice or care about. They have said repeatedly that the delay was over the communication issue and building a workaround. The EFB won't be anything thrilling because there isn't anything particularly thrilling about an EFB in the first place. It's a tool. It makes me wonder what people are expecting it to do that would be so innovative and exciting. It's an EFB. For the end user, the communication issue part of it is meaningless and transparent. As long as it works, no one cares how the code is written or in what language. It's easy to set expectations that allow you to be constantly disappointed and angry. Like when you don't get the Ferrari you were expecting on Christmas morning.