5 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

The only difference is you have external code doing this rather than the initiated thread/process.  

Wow, you just described memory injection, external code making executions within an authorised process, Specifically PE Injection. It runs on a similiar principle to ARPC which depends on .DLL injection instead. However both techniques overwrite the memory offsets of the MSFS executable to alter the atmospheric coeeficients amongst other things. In short both of these programs rely on some form of memory injection.

 

5 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Also, how does anyone here know exactly what REX Atmos is doing?  Got proof?  Does Microsoft have proof?  A hack can mean many things that aren't related to replacing data at a virtual address from an external process ... could be many things.

Simply that there is no SDK to achieve what REX is doing. There is however, similiar programs that achieve what REX is doing through memory injection techniques. It's a pretty safe assumption that REX is doing the same. It's not a coincidence that both Atmos and ARPC are banned on the official forums. You can also just use a memory scanner like Cheat Engine to view if the offsets are changed, however you'd need to know where to look first.

 

5 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Finally, if such a "hack" works then why isn't that data being made available to the SDK for read/write?  In most cases when a company obfuscates functionality it's because there are other financial interests (parties) wanting some level of exclusivity (which we already know that exists in MSFS).

You lot and your conspiracy theories about exclusivity or financial interests lol. Did you bother to read the rest of what I said in my original statement? Though for your sake incase you missed it:

Quote

we would all love a super extensive SDK, that allows devs to do any and all to product in a legal manner. Unfortunately we don’t which, for a multitude of reasons but is what it is.

Some people assume anything can be an SDK, its just a simple read/write right? There's technical limitations to making everything an SDK. For example Asobo may have built their atmospheric with forced hardcoding and no forms of abstraction with which to build an SDK on. Why they did this? Probably didn't think it was important, or really a multitude of reasons. However we won't see Asobo publishing the memory offsets to adjust atmospheric conditions cause that is not purpose built in the slightest. I would love to have an SDK so REX doesn't have to resort to this but we are where we are.

 

5 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

But I agree, this isn't some "new" tactic from Microsoft, they've been doing this for decades.  It's a double edged sword, why Microsoft want to operate this way with entertainment software is beyond me, there can't be that much $$$ at stake to attract such a negative perception.

Everyone does this, no company wants people overwriting memory values in their executables, thats opportunity for a crazy bag of legal worms that no one wants to open. You can do loads of nefarious stuff by allowing memory injection (the principle reason why WASM has replaced .DLL files, discussed right in the SDK) that no company wants to be responsible for.

I'm sorry but this is hubris talking for wanting something so badly, without understanding the implications for what it entails.

 

However since is bears repeating a THIRD time. You are free to use Atmos and purchase it. You are free to discuss it in a non-official community space. Asobo is not preventing you from using this software in anyway or form. Just do not talk about it in their official space. This is dramatized way more than it needs to be.

Seriously good grief REX has been around forever, this topic reads like people making whine out of sour grapes. What the heck has happened to Avsim come on. 

18 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

Some people assume anything can be an SDK, its just a simple read/write right?

Probably because you're not a software engineer.  I never said it was "simple" but the very fact it can be done means it is simple to expose to the community via SDK.

Writing and Reading to memory addresses is not "injection", never has been and the term was only recently used in development platforms (like Blazor for example) which some people not understanding the technology ran with the word "injection".  I've been developing software since the Motorola 6809 starting with Assembly language (circa 1981).  I have a pretty good grasp of what defines an SDK or PDK or other developer kits and I have created some of my own for use by other developers (not flight sim related).

I absolutely understand the implications and the potential for unsafe execution, just more of a reason to provide safe execution ... it would be easy to implement for developers and provide a better visual experience for users.  I honestly can't imagine why you would be against it??  Win win for both user and developer but apparently not for any exclusive agreements.

No conspiracy theory, just business, Microsoft did this early on in MSFS ... it's called making an internal deal with a vendor/development team and providing them with exclusivity ... happens all the time, for better or worse ... in this case I'd suggest worse as it delayed better developers to provide the platforms they had already established.  Again, not a conspiracy, just a poorly executed business decision made by JN.

22 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Executable code does this all the time"?  That's blatant misinformation and misdirection.  The general programmer writing in C++ is not typically writing directly to specific memory locations, or even reading from specific memory locations. You let the compiler determine the final machine instructions and those machine instructions determine how the data is pushed to memory or read from memory.  A C++ programmer will allocate and deallocate objects, but the code they write is compiled by the compiler and the compiler handles the actual instructions on how the data is pushed to memory and retrieved from memory (along with the operating system).

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about ... sorry for being blunt but you are spreading wrong information.  You don't "push" data to memory, you read from it or write to it ... you might "Push" code to a Git repository but not to volatile memory.  Do you know what IPC is?  If you want to learn we can go over this, but it sounds like you've already decided.  How many years have you been a software developer?  What technologies and platforms have you used?

1 hour ago, CO2Neutral said:

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about ... sorry for being blunt but you are spreading wrong information.  You don't "push" data to memory, you read from it or write to it ... you might "Push" code to a Git repository but not to volatile memory.  Do you know what IPC is?  If you want to learn we can go over this, but it sounds like you've already decided.  How many years have you been a software developer?  What technologies and platforms have you used?

Push/pull, or read/write. Why do you get so hung up over the wording I use?  If you like, substitute my use of push/pull with read/write. Does that make you feel better?

I have a computer science degree and I have been doing software development forever. I was programming assembly off the Motorola 68000 for one of my comp sci courses, so yes, I was reading/writing directly to memory with machine instructions.

Are you strictly a low level programmer? Because I don't get why you are trying to normalize memory injection.  For your typical C/C++, Java, C# developer, etc, they are not doing memory injection.  Like I said before, memory injection is commonly used by game hackers to cheat, it's not a common standard technique used in software development.

 

Quote

Writing and Reading to memory addresses is not "injection", never has been and the term was only recently used in development platforms (like Blazor for example) which some people not understanding the technology ran with the word "injection". 

This is misleading again.  Writing to memory addresses not used by other software applications is not memory injection. Those are open memory locations not being used. Of course! 

Writing to memory addresses that are currently used by other software applications actively running is memory injection. Stop misleading people.

Edited October 8, 20241 yr by abrams_tank

On 10/7/2024 at 12:04 AM, Damian Clark said:

Correct.  We absolutely DO NOT do any memory injection, hacking, or non-SDK/accepted practices for ASFS.  This is why we did not release ASFS for so long and why it was such a challenge.  We had to figure out how to control weather within the existing framework/SDK and we are using the CoherentGT/HTML/CSS/Javascript UI capability as lightly outlined in the SDK documentation.  This is also why we have been advocating strongly (despite incredibly surprising public criticism) for proper SDK capability to allow additional control.

Why don't we hack MSFS2020 when others perhaps do?  Because, in an unprecedented fashion, MS/Asobo/Jorg specifically asked all devs not to do that, and indicated that additional SDK capability would be coming, before MSFS2020 even released (in public videos) and we've always respected them and their wishes.  Even when it has literally killed us financially.  And even if this has been a somewhat acceptable/common practice prior to MSFS2020.  HiFi would never go against the wishes/goals of simulator developer and we are very much in support of MS/Asobo and their efforts.  Maybe one day our sacrifice here will pay off.

So, we're still advocating for additional weather SDK capability for MSFS since 2020 (now 2024).  And we hope more will join in and support this advocacy, even if there are legal/commercial conflicts of interest.  Things can change, perhaps.

 

Sorry Damien but it is not MS and Asobo  fault to keep your business open.

On 10/7/2024 at 7:09 AM, AnkH said:

Yeah, some accept this fact, others question the rules and disagree with them. Always like this. I rather belong to the second group if rules are obviously ridiculous and close to censorship. You do not, fine. 

BTW: as mentioned, it is THE official forum for a product I paid for. Heck, there is even official support there (besides Zendesk) and if you get banned because of those «rules», your experience with the product you paid for is basically hampered. I doubt that they could win any lawsuit when someone being banned for just mentioning such addons would seriously go down the route of law. 

 

It's Microsoft's forums. They pay for it, they host it, it's their private property - they get to set the rules in exactly the same way AVSim does on their forum.

As for support, while zendesk exists you'd have serious difficulty claiming you were denied support if you couldn't access the forums.

4 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

it would be easy to implement for developers and provide a better visual experience for users.

This clearly tells that you you have no knowledge about creating SDKs.

Otherwise you'd know the cost of adding "too much" to the SDK. 

Every feature made available via SDK means that the platform overall becomes more risky and less stable to maintain. Testing effort, support effort, maintenance effort, documenation effort, trainig effort all go up. Extensibility goes down (think about adding new features in the future). That is the reason why the SDK does not offer to interact with the sim for everything. You are asking for this and 1000 other guys are asking for something else. If Asobo would have  listened to all of them, any further progress would be locked down by now and the sim would not work at all anymore.

4 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Probably because you're not a software engineer.  I never said it was "simple" but the very fact it can be done means it is simple to expose to the community via SDK.

I'm going to ignore your crass attempt at insulting my experience in my career.

 

4 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Writing and Reading to memory addresses is not "injection", never has been and the term was only recently used in development platforms (like Blazor for example) which some people not understanding the technology ran with the word "injection".  I've been developing software since the Motorola 6809 starting with Assembly language (circa 1981).  I have a pretty good grasp of what defines an SDK or PDK or other developer kits and I have created some of my own for use by other developers (not flight sim related).

I genuinely.. at this point, do not care. This is 2024, we're not writing in assembly. We're not directly writing or reading memory when using high-level languages such as Rust, C++ or Javascript (The primarily languages used to interface with MSFS), that is the responsibility of the compilier. You clearly don't have any grasp of the MSFS SDK, maybe when you were working with FPGAs back in your day that's what you did. That is not how we interface with the various APIs in MSFS now.

If you're going to make comments regarding this topic, atleast reference it, not you're experience working with assembly because it has absolutetly nothing to do with the current situation. The software development world is massively different to what you did and almost everyone is working with high level languages unless they have specific needs to work with memory. In which low-level languages are the obvious choice. This is not the case here.

4 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

it would be easy to implement for developers and provide a better visual experience for users.  I honestly can't imagine why you would be against it??  Win win for both user and developer but apparently not for any exclusive agreements.

Yes, it would be easy, if the SDK was built on directly reading and writing memory, it is not. 5 minutes working with it would've demonstrated that. I am not against having an API to interface with the sim's atmospheric conditions. I am against the solution you're proposing which goes directly against the schema design that the SDK currently entails. As-well as works on the principle of memory injection.

I'm sure @abrams_tank and myself have been very clear about what the situation is here. You can continue doubling down. Though I figure there's nothing more I can say to you to portray how you're suggesting is downright dangerous. I also implore you, if you have not yet. Read up on the CURRENT MSFS SDK. To get some kinda of understanding of why you're suggestion wouldn't work.

2 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Sorry Damien but it is not MS and Asobo  fault to keep your business open.

Whether this is true or not, this is such a crass and unnecessary comment to make and adds nothing to the point Damien was trying to make.

In this certain forum there was always some "weekly changing and harsh and even more harsh enforced terms and conditions" drama, and endless corporate-drama, and endless drama and escalations about literally ANYTHING, even when posting a picture of a real airplane or the real cockpit photo the postings was censored because "no real-world aviation topics are allowed" and blah blah blah drama drama and escalations nonstop.  Every morning begun with at least 10 new automatic emails from this forum that all my topics and postings where "hidden or removed because of some terms and conditions yadda-yadda...."

I am so happy I got perma-banned in this forum for life last year (or was it two years ago... not sure anymore time really flies by), that saves me so much endless drama about literally everything and every topic possible. 👍 If I want to discuss airplane technology and interesting topics about aviation and flying I come here, to YouTube or to the DCS forum! 🙂

6 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

genuinely.. at this point, do not care

Odd considering the amount of words you posted in this thread.  OMG, not writing or reading to memory??  Ok, pointless to continue, you really have no idea do you?  You jump on the distraction band wagon because I referenced Assembly Language but ignore my reference to Blazor … which if you had a clue operates under WASM … and if you understood the MSFS SDK you’d know how important WASM is to MSFS.

Doubling down on what exactly?  If you both want to continue to make stuff up go for it, heck you even have people that seem to believe your false narrative (happens all the time as folks just want to believe).

I see neither one of you want to discuss IPC?

Your defense of not want to add more to an SDK is mind boggling and certainly doesn’t help get users what they want.  What is even more mind boggling you have a few folks that seem to support you … wow! 

 

8 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

Whether this is true or not, this is such a crass and unnecessary comment to make and adds nothing to the point Damien was trying to make.

Well maybe its time for some developers stop trying to recreate the wheel and think outside the box (their minds) and create something else. //42 managed to do this and Chaseplane "their best seller for FSX/P3D" is yet make an release for MSFS get my point. MS will not allow 3rd party (weaher) is their option and nobody else's. Deal with it.

Edited October 8, 20241 yr by JBDB-MD80

Flight Simming since mid 80's, watched forums grow 3rd party grow now witnessing the degradation of this unique niche. MSFS 2020 is nothing but computer eye candy now, word not allowed physics and now witnessing some in the community bent on destroying a project by a developer that has done nothing but their best to improve the simm on its last days before the new 2024 over semantics. I fear inside like stated before, whine out of sour grapes. I am sorry Tom what has happened to your beloved project.  

17 hours ago, JetCat said:

In this certain forum there was always some "weekly changing and harsh and even more harsh enforced terms and conditions" drama, and endless corporate-drama, and endless drama and escalations about literally ANYTHING, even when posting a picture of a real airplane or the real cockpit photo the postings was censored because "no real-world aviation topics are allowed" and blah blah blah drama drama and escalations nonstop.  Every morning begun with at least 10 new automatic emails from this forum that all my topics and postings where "hidden or removed because of some terms and conditions yadda-yadda...."

I am so happy I got perma-banned in this forum for life last year (or was it two years ago... not sure anymore time really flies by), that saves me so much endless drama about literally everything and every topic possible. 👍 If I want to discuss airplane technology and interesting topics about aviation and flying I come here, to YouTube or to the DCS forum! 🙂

Any commercial forum is like this, even your beloved DCS forum. Its the way its supposed too be. It will always be biased towards the respective companies policies. Get over it…

Edited October 9, 20241 yr by Kaboki