Did Aerosoft commit an airport release date using this new method?

 

I thought that Split was to be the first.

I wonder what JV would do if the new all singing/dancing dovetail sim is found to be written as a 64 bit program,why would dovetail/anyone write a new flightsim program as 32 bit,with it,s already known issues? 

peter

What exact part of a 64 bit conversion do you think would take years? If the API doesn't structurally change where do you see the work that would take that long? Or is that your time estimate until every last vendor has ported?

 

A cheap and nasty way would simply  recompiling the existing source code using a 64-bit complier and then pick out the bugs on by one. But then  Lockheed Martin would still have a10 year old application based on FSX technology, or even earlier.

 

A betterr alternative is to take advantagesof the improvements in computers and their operating systems in the  last 10 years.  This would give an  application with a better increased life in the future. One obvious change is muiltiprocessing which will not be trivial task.

 

Given that there's an case for updating PreparD then there's also a case to improvei and enhance its data files  There's a GiGO effect, because unless the files contain the necessary data the simulation can't use them.  For example, the .air files that contain  only small set of the available aircraft aerodynamic data.   Source code for .air files is written psuedo-ssembly code (.asm - anyone even use that now) and has to be compiled into .air files to use in the simulation. Current practice to use text based, or XML based structures  to deal them now.

 

Lockheed Martin will set its priorites here based in commercial aspects.

It is very interesting that people say that "we" are not the target "market" for P3D, yet *just go to the official web page for P3D*. Do take the blindfolds off and see the countless "featured developers" all over the front page. These featured developers are companies little me knew about before any air-force general knew about. Please understand that a lot of thought has to go into what is being displayed on a company website, especially the front page! Now if I'm an air-force general in charge of training and I researched these featured developers, wouldn't I call this a "game"??? I mean is orbx scenery or captain sim planes so important to any air-force? Not really, not in the least  to be honest, right? So why does orbx and others (that simmers have known for much longer than P3D has existed!) have such a close relationship with LM to the point that they are on the front page of LM for all air-force generals to see??? 

 

Maybe LM has another website that none of us know about, but since you don't know about it, then you know nothing about another target market, that I'm pretty sure does not exist given the fact that you can buy that professional plus product for $2300.00 on this "flooded with *our* add-ons" (advertisements/marketing) webpage.

 

There is more talked about concerning our form of simming and add-ons than the P3D product it self. Heck, FightSimCon 2015 is the "latest news" for 3/10/2015!!

 

Don't fool yourself into thinking that P3D is anything without us simmers. P3D would die pretty quick without us. Trust that facts of what you can plainly see on the website and say "target market" to yourself. What is marketing? Its all over the *front page* of the P3D website!

 

Also my take on 64 bit is simple and true: P3D will either become 64 bit or it *will* fade away. The same is true of any new flight simulator from Dovetail. Pete Dowson's concern about the possible irresponsibility on the part of developers with the extra space is a valid concern, but we have had to deal with similar irresponsibility in the past and those developers have been and will be exposed fast enough....all we have to do is be patient and let the news/reviews unfold before we purchase.  

Prepar3D is more than just a flight simulation.

Howso? Can you expand on that please.

 

As well, agree, X-PLANE falls very short for us heavy liner fliers.

JV responded again about P3d 64 bit and now the thread is locked:

 

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/94698-love-the-new-hd-trees-but/?p=862355

 

 

A cheap and nasty way would simply  recompiling the existing source code using a 64-bit complier and then pick out the bugs on by one. But then  Lockheed Martin would still have a10 year old application based on FSX technology, or even earlier.

That is true and I agree that the overhead for releasing 'just' a 64 bit adaption would be prohibitive and impractical. That is why I said that although it 'could' be done rather quickly doesn't mean it 'will' be done. 

 

 

 

A betterr alternative is to take advantagesof the improvements in computers and their operating systems in the  last 10 years.  This would give an  application with a better increased life in the future. One obvious change is muiltiprocessing which will not be trivial task.

 

Windows 10 and DX12  are just around the corner. I have a feeling that's more of a concern for them right now than 64 bit. But there is no way there won't eventually be a 64 bit version unless P3D gets abandoned. All software will head that way, it's just a natural progression.

 

As for who is the main customer: Have you noticed how much work goes into the SimDirector? How many adaptions are being made to support weapons systems? It might give you a clue where else the money comes from. But if nothing else we serve as an invaluable and mostly free crowd of testers of the stability of the core sim. That it itself would make it worth wile for LM to maintain a public version. The money that just Steve alone must have saved them by being a beta tester is probably quite substantial.

It's always entertaining when JV gets his panties in a wad over one thing or another.

I am sure that John Venema knows more than I do but on this i think he is incorrect.  LM will have to move to 64-bit, there business customers will demand it, you can only make so many efficiency savings; as he correctly says "No sim will survive without 3rd party content", well it's that very same 3rd party content that causes OOM errors, i imagine that you can fly around in vanilla P3D without any memory issues, but (ironically enough) add in ORBX scenery along with complex airports and aircraft and bang, you are lucky it get 2 hrs of flight. 

This is a commercial sim. It doesn't need eye candy which is what requires more memory and hardware. For commercial purpose, all you need is a solid aircraft, the ground, the sky and the runway. If you were running a commercial operation, you would probably only invest in an aircraft and just use default scenery with updated nav data. Same goes for educational use; that's all you need. That would run very well with any aircraft. Most of us are looking at this product from the wrong angle. Just because some entertainment add-on devs are building for P3D, doesn't mean LM is going to cater to the entertainment market. They will build the product for a purpose, and that purpose doesn't include most of us.

JV responded again about P3d 64 bit and now the thread is locked:

 

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/94698-love-the-new-hd-trees-but/?p=862355

 

Haha! Lovely bit of backtracking from Mr. Venema.

 

Signed, "AVSIM Keyboard Warrior"

 

 

more memory

 

Which will require a move to 64-bit.

 

 

 

For commercial purpose, all you need is a solid aircraft, the ground, the sky and the runway

 

Really, i remember many years ago watching the Krypton factor on UK TV, originally the Level-D Sims where pretty much as you describe, no 'Eye-Candy' at all, but after a few seasons, guess what; the 'Eye-Candy' came into the Sim.  I think that you will find most commercial organisations will want a realistic environment, which means 'Eye-Candy', otherwise, why go past wireframe graphics?

Which will require a move to 64-bit.

 

 

 

 

Really, i remember many years ago watching the Krypton factor on UK TV, originally the Level-D Sims where pretty much as you describe, no 'Eye-Candy' at all, but after a few seasons, guess what; the 'Eye-Candy' came into the Sim.  I think that you will find most commercial organisations will want a realistic environment, which means 'Eye-Candy', otherwise, why go past wireframe graphics?

 

Perhaps, but I guess it all boils down to how much effort it will take to get to 64bit and how much it will cost them. I doubt that staying at 32bit will have much impact on commercial sales. I think they will focus on what commercial vendors need first and foremost. Land class is important, but high res textures is probably last on the list.

 

 

Howso? Can you expand on that please.

 

Prepar3d's SimObject can model  more than aircraft.

 

 

And it is a reason for me to reevaluate any future Orbx purchases

 I don't think of it that way.  Orbx products stand on their own right.  They are excellent, and I plan to buy a bunch more in the future, 64bit not a factor.  I just think JV might be going through some stress looking at the map forward that he's going to have to invest a little bit more in order to keep up with the evolution of his market.  Very normal response, because committing to meet change isn't always as "refreshing" as we see it should be when it's not our money, but not the most effective response.  I think it's time to encourage rather than discourage.  I'm very curious do see what Orbx can do with a 64bit space.  I've always thought if someone connects their visuals to some great storytelling through adventure situations there might be a new niche there too.  There is lots of room for growth yet.  But like I said, it's not our risk.

I too, think highly of Orbx products. If it wasn't for them, I'd probably loose interest in flight simulation. I did quit for a year and a half, because my computer was outdated. My specific plan, was new computer, FSX with Orbx, and some X-plane 10 for mountains. Orbx has transformed the entire mountain west, into very enjoyable panoramic flights.  I did this in real life, for many years, as I owned an airplane, and my wife and I flew all over these states. So..............I too, see many farther Orbx additions in my future.