PhilTaylor

BAO and Bruce Artwick https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Artwick

for any product with extensibility and an SDK; during the Alpha/Beta/RC/Ship cycle the extensibility team needs to select a subset of the developer community due to the size of the community and the size the subset of the dev team that handles the incoming. just to size this, back of the envelope, as an example: if the SDK team is 20 people ( 10% of the 200 ) then 2-4 of those are likely to be the customer facing and dealing with the external incoming as well as the internal "day job". how many ISVs can 2 people handle? 50? that seems like a lot but do-able. more than that, not likely. the art and science of this is picking a representative subset of the dev community that will exercise all of the scope of the extensibility/SDK functionality to find issues. so expecting "all developers" to be contacted is just a tad unreasonable.

see https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ptaylor/2007/10/03/acceleration-and-sp2/ and http://www.joyofsetup.com/2007/12/16/flight-simulator-x-service-pack-2-available-and-how-to-work-around-common-problems/ note SP2 requires SP1 to be installed.

That wasn't part of either SP1 or SP2, and I don't see it in the Dovetail SE list here: http://steamcommunity.com/app/314160/discussions/0/496881136926977562/ So no.

Bert, Thanks. We thought it was solid work when we released, it's nice to see it has truly "stood the test of time". And I was honored at the time to have the freedom to make the call on what was "in". Yes, alpha-fade autogen was on our list, props to the LM team for getting it done. Phil

Maybe exactly what SP1 did in terms of threading and peformance needs to be clarified: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/microsoft-flight-simulator-x-soars-to-new-heights-with-multi-threading http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ptaylor/archive/2007/05/15/performance-work-in-sp1.aspx And SP2: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ptaylor/archive/2007/10/02/acceleration-and-sp2.aspx

no worries there, just want to be sure of accurate data. one of the reasons, after all this time, 6+ years, that FSX (and its step-child P3D ) are still "what we have", is there are sooooo many challenges to making a full-world sim. the "sim engine and rendering engine" are almost dwarfed by the business and technical challenges of generating the world-data-set, for instance. the interlocking data agreements alone are serious business. and that's just the mesh; without human footprint ( urbania, suburbania, farmland, etc ), or airports, or planes to fly, or cockpits, or 3 types of traffic, or sky ( atmosphere, sun, moon, stars ), or water, or appearance of land, or add-ons, or .... still, the Steam version breathed some life into the old beast, and it will be exciting to see the VR version of FSX.

uh, not true. unless something was broken after.

http://fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=SDKand http://fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?titl...ation_%28FSX%29are probably what you are looking for.

if you search this forum using "sp2 tweaks" and look at the 5th hit "FSX question for Phil Taylor" you will get some, but likely not all, of what you are looking for.

ESP does not provide source code, it is a binary license only.I provided more details here:http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007...-announced.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007...ore-on-esp.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007...p-part-iii.aspx

thanks for the explanation.the fact that they replace every airport means they are inappropriate for individual airports, as Martin stated, so between the 2 of you it is clearer now.thanks