fs_av

I am salivating at some of the responses posted thus far. However, I do have a couple more questions before I drum up enough courage to try it or convince my better half that an HDTV is just as good as a computer monitor ! With the prices of HDTV's coming down it would seem to make more sense to have an HDTV than a regular computer monitor, even with a PC tuner card, wouldn't it ? With the HDTV setup, would the computer have to be turned off to watch TV for instance ? Or would the HDTV have to have the PIP - picture in picture capability ?

Appreciate your response. Any degradation on picture quality and/or resolution relative to a computer monitor ? As to other hardware, does that mean you use a wireless keyboard and wireless mouse - 63" is a bigass TV to be sitting up close to ! Come to think of it, is there a wireless joystick too ?

I am just curious. I have seen people talking about their setups and connecting their PC's to their big screen TV's. If it's possible, what is required to accomplish it - any special hardware, connections on the PC as well as on TVs ?

Very good of you to make your contribution open source. Even more amazing, as you suggest in your post "support of other simulators/modes as easy as possible, permitting the support of Fly!Legacy, and a little (buggy) fsx mode." Don't know how guys like you and Jonathan Harris do your magic but every bit helps and is appreciated more than perhaps you will ever know. After all, there may be many simulators but there is only one real world, so why can't tools make that "one real world" a reality instead of the many incarnations like "plausible world" or "as real as it gets", etc. Thank you and hope you have more time and enthusiasm to continue what you have started. Edit : The Google groups gives an error; perhaps Yahoo groups would be better.

The only way I can think of is to convert the dsf file to a text file using Ben's tool DSF2txt.exe (http://scenery.x-plane.com/tools.php) and manually changing the elevation figures. Tedious no doubt but seems to be the only way that is publicly available todate. All this is assuming the dsf2txt tool works on the current dsf files as bundled with v10. Haven't used that tool in a while, so I am not sure. Good luck with your efforts and do keep us posted on your progress.

People only see or hear what they want to see or hear. There is nothing worse than a born again whatever or X-plane diehards with thin skins. I am fs_av and I am a recovering X-plane diehard! I believe, the OP, as quoted above is referring to 3rd party products NOT 3rd party product support. X-plane needs 3rd parties to support it by having a stable, reliable, steady predictable X-plane platform. The reluctance on the part of 3rd parties to jump on board the X-plane wagon is mainly 2-fold, as I see it without giving it a lot of thought : 1. A stable X-plane platform. 2. Some way to protect 3rd parties copyright for the products they develop. Support for the products comes when the 3rd parties have developed and sold the products.

I believe Austin mentioned WED as Ben's application either in the teamspeak or somewhere else, I am not sure; and since it is not bundled with X-plane 10 Global unlike Planemaker or Worldmaker in v5/v6/v7/v8/v9, which were bundled with the main program. Worldmaker was a more versatile comprehensive program compared to WED and it was thrown by the wayside without the necessary attention devoted to WED for it's debut with v8 (some 7 or so years ago). WED, nice as it is, still lacks the full functionality of Worldmaker. ****************** If you look at my post a little more carefully, perhaps you will see that I used the word "license", not "right". That was deliberate on my part. Let me post the exact quote here in case you missed it : There is a certain level of obligation/loyalty/duty/continuity on the part of a software publisher to it's existing user base. Doesn't LR owe an explanation as to why certain features are deleted even when they are working? In the past, the attitude has been that "if you don't like an update, don't use it". Windows updates don't work that way, meaning they just don't arbitrarily delete features or leave you hanging. Perhaps LR can learn something there. The difference is you pay for the whole thing upfront, including for however many updates; and there is no refund or moneyback gurantee.

GoranM, I don't think you get it. Needless to say, I disagree with the assertions above. First, let's be clear on my criticism about WED, "scenery developer software" as you called it. My criticism is basically twofold : 1. WED, supposedly a replacement for the Worldmaker of old, is NOT bundled with the main program like Planemaker or Airfoilmaker are. Why is that? WED, according to Austin, is Ben's application and treats it like a "pariah"; Austin/LR has no obligation to support, continue development or maintain compatibility with future updates or versions. 2. LR has removed features whenever it feels like it, thanks to the frequent updates; e.g. removal of the facade making capability from Worldmaker (v8/v9), removal of keyboard flying capability i.e. without a mouse or joystick, etc. Even if the features removed were not all that popular, meaning not many people actually used them, that should not give LR the automatic license to remove either of them! I mention the two features that were removed because I personally liked using each one of them, particularly because I concentrated more on development rather than flying and couldn't be bothered with the mouse or investing in a joystick that I would use rarely, if at all. I understand that a plugin for keyboard control was later developed to fill the void/need. But, it's not the same. **********************^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*********************^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^******************* It seems like you are unclear about what the priorities are or should be. Patients do not exist because there are doctors. Users don't exist because there are "professionals". This X-plane forum exists for the users. Developers are also welcome - atleast until, despite forum rules and guidelines, they cross the line from posting opinions or information to pushing commercial products. And, BTW, there is a separate protected "X-Plane Add-On Developer's Forum". I don't know why it is "protected". Not really. First, you assume that to be true. Secondly, MANY USERS ARE DEVELOPERS TOO, they may not be "commercial" developers like you and Tom or openly declare themselves as developers. Additionally, for every developer like you, there are perhaps hundreds more who are not "commercial" developers. MortenM, a freeware developer todate AFAIK, is one who has been around for quite a while and has made some amazing contributions over the years, along with his colleagues at X-plane Freeware group. One can come up with a myriad of reasons why developers may choose to not post here at AVSIM, OR ANYWHERE ELSE for that matter. In X-plane's case, there aren't that many "commercial" developers to begin with - and again, one can come up with many reasons why that's the case - but that's a topic for another day perhaps!

raymar, couldn't agree with your post more. It is a dis-service to potential FSX (or any other platform) converts, OP and other readers/contributors to restrict views on one or the other platform since the topic title actually names the other sim by name. Overall, the flow of posts has been positive and civil for the most part, except perhaps for a few personal attacks. Please, let's not restrict views and/or lock topics just because one or two posters have crossed the lines on ettiquette or behaviour on this or any other fora.

In most of my posts, if not all, I have compared X-plane to the promises and hype put forth by LR, hardly with FSX, if ever - not that there is anything wrong with that since this branch of AVSIM is devoted to X-plane and the topic title actually names the other sim by name, FSX. So, IMHO, any and all comparisons are fair game. After over a decade of X-plane sponsorship, with each release of a new version, I am growing tired of waiting for X-plane to fulfil it's "potential" promise or live up to it's hype. Like many people, the "plausible world" disappoints me because it is totally unrealistic and v8 and v9 provided a far more realistic world; so in that sense, v10 is a step backwards. An actual quote from the website : "X-Plane 10 Global is the world’s most comprehensive and powerful flight simulator for personal computers, and it offers the most realistic flight model available." If X-plane actually delivered on the stated promise of a "comprehensive" flight simulator, perhaps we would not be in this position of comparing X-plane to FSX. In another thread, I was asked about what my agenda was since I have been critical of the program and the publisher's practices. My answer to that is simply to tell the publisher that what was acceptable in the past in terms of practices, incompleteness or the lack of polish in the product will be less acceptable in future. Some of us have been around long enough to criticise LR for it's repeated failures in delivering a complete, polished and comprehensive product. Fortunately, LR seems to be getting the message, albeit, far too slowly, even if many diehards still don't seem to. I know because I was one of those diehards for a number of years!

Heiko : Let's get a few things straight, shall we ? 1. I am not here to please you or entertain you ! 2. Ask me IF I CARE whether what I say annoys you. 3. There is ABSOLUTELY NO CHARGE for reading or for ignoring any post. You have that right, as do I. SO MOVE ALONG ! 4. Rather than ATTACKING MY RIGHT to say what I have to say, why don't you CHALLENGE WHAT I HAVE SAID ? Looking forward to a fruitful exchange about X-plane rather than personalities.

Thank you for the link.I take it that either you fail to see the distinction I made in my post or the distinction was not clear enough. So here goes. WED is NOT an LR/X-plane application; it's a side development not on the same level as Planemaker or Worldmaker of old. IT'S A PARIAH Ben application towards which LR/Austin has no obligation whatsoever to continue or maintain, much less maintain compatibility thru various updates or versions! That's indeed a pity because users are EXPECTED to contribute towards converting the lackluster "plausible" to the real world. The topic title includes the word "development" - compared to v9, the word "regression" would perhaps be more appropriate instead.

I have said elsewhere, that the size of the publisher or publisher's team must not have any bearing on the quality, bugginess or completeness of the product published - just as Mazda, Subaru, Mitsubishi, Kia, etc. don't get a pass for putting out an incomplete, faulty or buggy product. If you want to play in the big leagues, play like the big boys and deliver on the promises you make ! Ten versions over a decade and a half isn't enough time or number of versions to practice on? Let's be a little careful in using the phrase "open source". Flightgear is an open source product, X-plane is not. Overlay Editor is not an LR SDK. In fact, the author appears to have given up on further development of that wonderful 3rd party freeware tool, thanks to Austin, Ben and LR. The more things change the more they stay the same. Yes, Planemaker, briefer etc. are made available but WED is neither blessed by LR nor bundled with every copy of X-plane like Planemaker and Worldmaker used to be ! IT IS THE LEAST LR SHOULD DO considering they EXPECT the community to contribute. I had written a post at the org on a topic titled "X-Plane 10 unfinished product?", which describes some of the problems that LR and it's owner/team have chosen to ignore, some of which I have already discussed here over the past few months : http://forums.x-plan...pic=59573&st=50 and http://forums.x-plan...pic=59573&st=70 A premature release of a product can hardly be described as "comprehensive" by any stretch of the imagination.

He started/hijacked a topic pushing a product, which I believe is sold by the same outfit that sells his own product. As a matter of public interest, one post without a link, would perhaps be acceptable from a NON-"commercial member", but .... If you don't see this as a conflict of interest and/or breaking of the forum rules by a commercial member, then no explanation will suffice for you.

Here we go crossing the line again ! How many times is it acceptable to push a commercial product with a link in these fora ? When will these "commercial members" understand the rules here ? When will the moderators step up and warn/flag/ban these "commercial members" ?