Keith_S

Fair enough, thank you Kyle for your comprehensive and well reasoned response. There are undoubtedly issues on both sides, P3D is criticised for it's poor UI, flat runways and 'on-rails' air physics, while XP has poor ground physics, thread restrictions and limited developer API. I'm still curious to know what is preventing further active XP development from PMDG however. Is it an issue of resource, API restrictions or perceived limited market share? The trend indicated by the Navigraph survey is certainly interesting and I'd very much hope to see a PMDG liner for XP within the next couple of years, which I (and I'm sure many others) would readily purchase. .

As far as I can tell Navigraph is fairly neutral with regard to the survey base. I would certainly be interested to hear if you have any results that are more recent than this to contradict the Navigraph survey, or perhaps your post itself is indicative of your own bias? Please feel free to enlighten me, I am genuinely interested to know the true situation (based on fact) regardless of preference.

Well, I was a P3D user until v3.4, after which I upgraded to X-Plane 11 and haven't looked back since.

That's a real shame. Especially in light of the new Navigraph survey showing X-Plane market share is now significantly bigger than FSX, equal with P3D and likely to overtake P3D by next year. The main reason preventing many people from moving from the ESP platform to XP is the lack of study level liners, so if PMDG got on board with XP the sky really would be the limit.