2 hours ago, GoranM said:

Am I correct in assuming that MSFS 2020 was never considered "Final"?

If so, I would've assumed Asobo would have tied off all the loose ends with SU16 and said something to the effect of "This is the final version of 2020.  We will continue to support it for the promised 10 year timeline, but our priority now is 2024".  

I can understand and sympathize with delays in updates, as I'm guilty of it myself, but I would always find some way to update everyone through some kind of official channel.

They always said they'll continue to work on 2020 and back port 2024 features, what I've always said is maintaining two massive simulations in tandem is incredibly hard to do - as is proven right now with the neglect of 2020 and the "catch up" they need to do with 2024.

Whether or not it'll all balance out it's anyone's guess, either way stretching the team across two Sims means there will be continuous glacier pace of certain areas of one Sim over the other.

Again poor management decisions in my opinion, it's hard to know exactly what their overall plan is going forward, almost like they pin ideas on a dart board and throw blindly to see what they work on next.

Somehow in the back yard from Asobo 🤣🫠

Take it happy, it will come out some Day..

cheers 😉

2 hours ago, St Mawgan said:

Every piece of software ever released is a beta whether it's a game or Windows. It is always constantly patched, tweaked and upgraded. 

 

An extension of that is that very, very few programs have been written which are totally bug free.

In the 1960s The IBM 360 OS had a utility called IEFBR14. Its function was to 'do nothing' so that it could be used as a dummy program in job steams to test them (this was well before the widespread use of interactive computing via screen and keyboard). Its programmer initially coded it as a single machine instruction "BR 14" which caused the program to return to the caller (usually the operating system itself) as it's a "Branch on register 14" instruction. When programs were started in OS/360 register 14 was preset to the address to return to. Unfortunately, to be useful in job stream testing the program should have set a return code, which by convention should be 0 for a successful execution. So this single instruction program had a bug in it, which was fixed by adding an additional instruction to clear register 15 before the "BR 14". Register 15 was used by the OS to pass back the return code. The buggy program never made it to release, but it shows how even simple programs can be buggy. Now extenthe that to the many thousands/millions of instructions in something like MSFS... 

Deleted - Duplicate post

Edited May 15, 20251 yr by ConstVoid
Duplicate

19 minutes ago, ConstVoid said:

a utility called IEFBR14.

Ahh, fond (?) memories. I remember the story well. In fact, I have the memory that it did get released and they had to issue an APAR for it. But that well be a false memory, embroidered for use in the mainframe classes I used to teach back at the dawn of time.

4 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

Ahh, fond (?) memories. I remember the story well. In fact, I have the memory that it did get released and they had to issue an APAR for it. But that well be a false memory, embroidered for use in the mainframe classes I used to teach back at the dawn of time.

To be honest I thought it had been released too, but I decided to check before posting, and found something written in 2005 by the programmer involved which indicated that the bug was discovered after the first compile and was fixed before release.

Ignoring all the predictable concern-trolling and worst case assumptions rampant here about MS/Asobo's plans for 2020, always best to look at what MS/Asobo have actually said thru official channels... Re: SU16 for 2020 and when the next set of fixes and enhancements will come, they covered this in the March 2025 dev Q&A at this timestamp: https://youtu.be/vaMcWJhRAAE?list=PLHHNa7e7hf9MqQB-RV6bxHYiLcTQkgGfi&t=555

As they've clearly said, multiple times, 2020 will be supported for at least a few more years if not more, and it will continue to get fixes/updates along with even backports of certain new features in 2024. Currently SU16 for 2020 is in development (i.e. updating to new GDK for memory use optimization, etc). Given how stable 2020 currently is, it certainly makes sense they are focusing on 2024 *currently* given its state at release. So focusing on 2024's SU1 and SU2 is the prudent decision. 2020 SU16 being delayed does not mean 2020 is abandoned 🙂 

And as Rimshot and many others pointed out (who're able to read/hear and understand what MS/Asobo have clearly said), MS/Asobo never promised that they'll be churning out new functionality/features/etc for free forever. They were talking about commitment to the MSFS *platform* and how they're in it for the long haul. Once again, good to hear directly from the source (in these interviews just after 2024's announcement they get asked about all this including the "10 year commitment" statement, 2020's future, etc):
https://www.helisimmer.com/interview/msfs-2024-helicopters-future-msfs-2020
https://msfsaddons.com/2023/06/25/exclusive-interview-with-jorg-neumann-and-sebastian-wloch-we-are-in-the-pursuit-of-the-perfect-sim/
 

Edited May 15, 20251 yr by lwt1971

8 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

As they've clearly said, multiple times, 2020 will be supported for at least a few more years if not more, and it will continue to get fixes/updates along with even backports of certain new features in 2024. Currently SU16 for 2020 is in development (i.e. updating to new GDK for memory use optimization, etc).....

Maybe they need to let IniBuilds know that MSFS 2020 has not been abandoned?

Just now, Christopher Low said:

Maybe they need to let IniBuilds know that MSFS 2020 has not been abandoned?

Can you give more specifics of what ini are not focusing on for 2020? You mean needed fixes for an aircraft or airport for 2020? At least for their new aircraft they changed their original plans and made the decision to release the new A350 for both 2020 and 2024. But ya in general most devs will only develop for 2024 going forward since they are following market forces and 2024 is the future for the platform. I'm sure if market conditions that they're privy to tell them 2020 is worth developing for also, then they will.
 

55 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Can you give more specifics of what ini are not focusing on for 2020? You mean needed fixes for an aircraft or airport for 2020? At least for their new aircraft they changed their original plans and made the decision to release the new A350 for both 2020 and 2024. But ya in general most devs will only develop for 2024 going forward since they are following market forces and 2024 is the future for the platform. I'm sure if market conditions that they're privy to tell them 2020 is worth developing for also, then they will.

I am not convinced that most airport developers will only develop for MSFS 2024 going forward, and I am certainly not convinced that the MSFS 2020 airport addon market is dead. IniBuilds seem to have made their decision very early. Whether that has anything to do with their partnership with MS/Asobo is anyone's guess.

Edited May 15, 20251 yr by Christopher Low

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I am not convinced that most airport developers will only develop for MSFS 2024 going forward, and I am certainly not convinced that the MSFS 2020 airport addon market is dead. IniBuilds seem to have made their decision very early. Whether that has anything to do with their partnership with MS/Asobo is anyone's guess.

Ya hard to say... if ini have made the decision to stop developing airports for 2020 but still are doing new aircraft (like the 350) for 2020, they must've done a cost/benefit analysis and figured it was more effort to dual-develop airports for both sims vs aircraft? ini's relationship with MS is purely contractual, so apart from that they're only looking after their bottom line and interests naturally.
 

Edited May 15, 20251 yr by lwt1971

34 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Ya hard to say... if ini have made the decision to stop developing airports for 2020 but still are doing new aircraft (like the 350) for 2020, they must've made a cost/benefit analysis and figured it was more effort to dual-develop airports for both sims vs aircraft?

I find INI's decision, well, interesting. PMDG announcing the 747s will be 24 only make complete sense. We aren't going to see those planes for a while.

There is a timeline where 24 usage will intersect 2020 usage. I am of the belief this will be around the time the PMDG 737s are in 24. Part of it is it's a popular airframe and will (likely) be the last 2020 holdout. But also since it's going to be a while and we will have more SUs that will help adoption.

INI releasing Gatwick for 2024 only I do feel is too soon to go 24-only. There are no shortage of metrics showing right now that 2020-usage is exceeding 2024 by as "little" as 2:1, and as much as 3:1. I routinely poll Volanta for 2020 vs 24 and the results are not kind for 2024. I am getting bad stutters on landing in 2024 SU2. When I backed down to SU1 I got a CTD starting the flight. I gave up and did the flight in 2020. I am pretty bullish on 2024 but my patience is expiring.

At the same time, the longer 2020 remains the platform of choice for a lot of users, the more the uphil climb 2024 has. I wonder if to help bridge that a serious sale is in the future by MS to really drive adoption.

 

Also, looks like Su2 dropped.

3 hours ago, BrammyH said:

I find INI's decision, well, interesting. PMDG announcing the 747s will be 24 only make complete sense. We aren't going to see those planes for a while.

There is a timeline where 24 usage will intersect 2020 usage. I am of the belief this will be around the time the PMDG 737s are in 24. Part of it is it's a popular airframe and will (likely) be the last 2020 holdout. But also since it's going to be a while and we will have more SUs that will help adoption.

INI releasing Gatwick for 2024 only I do feel is too soon to go 24-only. There are no shortage of metrics showing right now that 2020-usage is exceeding 2024 by as "little" as 2:1, and as much as 3:1. I routinely poll Volanta for 2020 vs 24 and the results are not kind for 2024. I am getting bad stutters on landing in 2024 SU2. When I backed down to SU1 I got a CTD starting the flight. I gave up and did the flight in 2020. I am pretty bullish on 2024 but my patience is expiring.

At the same time, the longer 2020 remains the platform of choice for a lot of users, the more the uphil climb 2024 has. I wonder if to help bridge that a serious sale is in the future by MS to really drive adoption.

Agree with most of what you said, except for the one bit about 2020 remaining platform of choice making it a more uphill climb for 2024. I think it's the reverse effect, and 2020 being the platform of choice for a majority currently (i.e. ~50% MSFS 2020, ~25% MSFS 2024, ~12% XP12, etc per Navigraph survey) is purely a consequence of 2024's state and stability. As 2024 increases in stability then those 2020 users are naturally going to transition and the length of time to get to that state (be it after SU2 or SU3 etc) is not going to necessarily impact the eventual uptake of 2024, IMO. If 2024 wasn't a superset of 2020 features/capabilities wise then ya things could be different, but assuming enough of the bugs are squashed and issues fixed by SU<xxx>, then at that point 2024 is basically a superset of 2020 right.
 

Edited May 15, 20251 yr by lwt1971

44 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

think it's the reverse effect, and 2020 being the platform of choice for a majority currently (i.e. ~50% MSFS 2020, ~25% MSFS 2024, ~12% XP12, etc per Navigraph survey) is purely a consequence of 2024's state and stability.

I do agree with this.

Where I was going is the longer those stability issues remain, the more hesitant people will get to move off 2020. If they ever do. With any sort of a migration like this there are always some people who for reasons stay with the old platform. Folks who tried 2024 and got burned are the hardest to get back into it.