28 minutes ago, DJJose said:

I reformatted my win 10 drive & installed win10 in about 10 minutes.

I still could run XPlane 11 which was is on another SSD. All I needed to do was re-install the GTN750 and Trainer. That was it!

X-Plane 11 rocks when it comes to starting over.

Agreed, if there's one thing I love about X-Plane, is it's installation. Makes everything so much easier. I wish the other flight sims would implement the same format or better, do it even better. I hope MSFS 2020 has a better way of doing it's install as well. God forbid if they use the same old method from FSX or P3D.

Forcing things also means breaking things...I think that's what drives the direction LM takes here.  One of the major critiques of XP is how even minor updates break a lot of add-ons that worked in the version before.

It's pretty clear that P3D is not on a revolutionary path, but rather an evolutionary one.  If revolution is what you crave, you should probably look elsewhere...the history of the franchise is clear enough to see the trend.

 

Totally disagree.  I like to install my scenery and aircraft into the P3D root directory and actually do not like the xml add on method.

Dave

8 hours ago, w6kd said:

Forcing things also means breaking things...I think that's what drives the direction LM takes here.  One of the major critiques of XP is how even minor updates break a lot of add-ons that worked in the version before.

It's pretty clear that P3D is not on a revolutionary path, but rather an evolutionary one.  If revolution is what you crave, you should probably look elsewhere...the history of the franchise is clear enough to see the trend.

 

I am not seeking for revelotion nor evelotion either. I just wish that updating the simulator becomes easier and that is not the case at this moment.

Look how many posts there are with questions about how to proceed with addons, how to move them, wait for installers or not, clean installs of p3d and so far and so on. 

It is obviously to complex and just uninstall and reinstall a new version can lead to instable behaviour.....

XML is the new way to go, as P3D recomments months ago. But due the fact a lot devs seem to "ignore" that makes it complex for us. 

Now we have in fact 2 methods to handle". Scenery.cfg AND XML. Not nice either.

I am still hopning that there will be a method to make it easier for us, one that works and cannot be ignored by the 3.Party devs.

I don´t care how "that" method would called. But please make it easier for us to upgrade.

Installing +200 Airports plus further addons costs me about a week. And all the ones using the old method, just because they did not upgrade OR even not used xml need extra attention and manual "work after installing" them.

I  can not imagine that there is just one simmer who don´t wants easier method of handling updates of P3D without affecting the addons.

Does the sim behave abnormal, disable them all and reinstall the sim. Than enable them one by one to look how the sim behaves. 

With files "everywhere" in the root folder that is clearly not possible. Big names like Flightbeam,, FlyTampe, PMDG, Aerosoft and so far and so on, even they are not outside the root.

Marcus

24 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

I am not seeking for revelotion nor evelotion either. I just wish that updating the simulator becomes easier and that is not the case at this moment.

Look how many posts there are with questions about how to proceed with addons, how to move them, wait for installers or not, clean installs of p3d and so far and so on. 

It is obviously to complex and just uninstall and reinstall a new version can lead to instable behaviour.....

XML is the new way to go, as P3D recomments months ago. But due the fact a lot devs seem to "ignore" that makes it complex for us. 

Now we have in fact 2 methods to handle". Scenery.cfg AND XML. Not nice either.

I am still hopning that there will be a method to make it easier for us, one that works and cannot be ignored by the 3.Party devs.

I don´t care how "that" method would called. But please make it easier for us to upgrade.

Installing +200 Airports plus further addons costs me about a week. And all the ones using the old method, just because they did not upgrade OR even not used xml need extra attention and manual "work after installing" them.

I  can not imagine that there is just one simmer who don´t wants easier method of handling updates of P3D without affecting the addons.

Does the sim behave abnormal, disable them all and reinstall the sim. Than enable them one by one to look how the sim behaves. 

With files "everywhere" in the root folder that is clearly not possible. Big names like Flightbeam,, FlyTampe, PMDG, Aerosoft and so far and so on, even they are not outside the root.

Marcus

Excellent post - we need customers to bug the devs and vote with wallet.  For me these days time is 100% money, I can not sit few days just to install my addons - f that.  I hope the players you mentioned are reading this and taking note.  

Edited April 14, 20206 yr by Skywolf

8 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Totally disagree.  I like to install my scenery and aircraft into the P3D root directory and actually do not like the xml add on method.

Dave

Could you explain why? Is there a benefit? Would be nice if you share your thoughts with us. 

Edited April 14, 20206 yr by mpo910

Well I confirmed with PMDG - they have NO plans of using addon method.  Just disappointed.

Orbx confirmed that the newest FastLane Orbx Central will be able to install Global outside the root directory (yay) - Atleast save time now with all Orbx Outside the Root Directory.

Looks I am going to install (The below list is all the addons in P3D4.5 installed outside the sim stress free)

FSReborn AI Pro with AIG (yep those install outside also)

Leonardo

Orbx

A2A

RealAir Birds

FSDT

Atleast all the above all install outside the sim and save me headaches.  I own all the PMDG licenses but will wait or just not install them - I am like meh.  B/C LM will either have hotfix or 5.X release in about 6 months (I do not want to repeat reinstalling addons again)

Edited April 14, 20206 yr by Skywolf

The xml method makes things much easier and should be figured out and adopted before moving on with P3D - devs and users alike. Some addons use legacy code that can't be moved or can't be adopted or can't be changed for some other reason. Ignoring the xml method will waste time in the long run. Using the addons window instead of the scenery window is much better for setting and unsetting addons.

How about forcing these "must run as admin addons" to work with "normal user rights" and only elevate privileges for the install - just like proper windows programs.

This is the best way to describe the .XML Method:

😄

8 hours ago, mpo910 said:

I am not seeking for revelotion nor evelotion either. I just wish that updating the simulator becomes easier and that is not the case at this moment.

Look how many posts there are with questions about how to proceed with addons, how to move them, wait for installers or not, clean installs of p3d and so far and so on. 

It is obviously to complex and just uninstall and reinstall a new version can lead to instable behaviour.....

XML is the new way to go, as P3D recomments months ago. But due the fact a lot devs seem to "ignore" that makes it complex for us. 

Now we have in fact 2 methods to handle". Scenery.cfg AND XML. Not nice either.

I am still hopning that there will be a method to make it easier for us, one that works and cannot be ignored by the 3.Party devs.

I don´t care how "that" method would called. But please make it easier for us to upgrade.

Installing +200 Airports plus further addons costs me about a week. And all the ones using the old method, just because they did not upgrade OR even not used xml need extra attention and manual "work after installing" them.

I  can not imagine that there is just one simmer who don´t wants easier method of handling updates of P3D without affecting the addons.

Does the sim behave abnormal, disable them all and reinstall the sim. Than enable them one by one to look how the sim behaves. 

With files "everywhere" in the root folder that is clearly not possible. Big names like Flightbeam,, FlyTampe, PMDG, Aerosoft and so far and so on, even they are not outside the root.

Marcus

I've got 320 add-on airports installed in P3Dv4, and yes, it takes a solid week to rebuild Rome from scratch.

A bunch of those are good working ports from FSX and earlier P3D versions, and their installers will never be updated.  Some of them won't work if moved to a different location.  I don't want to be forced to give up those add-ons.  One of the major strengths in P3D has been its robust backwards compatibility.  I would much prefer that pressure be applied to the noncompliant going forward by their customers, and not through taking a hammer to backwards compatibility...in other words, you can choose to not buy a noncompliant product if xml-based packaging is that important to you. 

I've already migrated most of my old-school addons from scenery.cfg to xml using Lorby-SI's P3D Addon Manager.  Now those can be more easily moved over, but it needs to be emphasized that just moving the xml package to the new sim does not ensure compatibility--when installing into a new sim for which it wasn't originally designed, I will still have to do work to check for compatibility and stability.  For example, we know that LM has updated the base scenery database in P3Dv5...from FSX through P3Dv4 we had the same 2006 base dataset.  Now, with many airports reflecting their more modern state (added runways, navaids, etc) the exclude polygons that are part of most add-on sceneries are potentially not going to match up with the updated airport in the base data, which I expect to lead to things like duplicated navaids and default pavement, buildings and signage peeking through where they're not wanted.  Whether it's installed via xml or scenery.cfg is not going to make a difference when it comes to the work needed to ensure fit and function.

 

 

The addon installation methods employed by older flight simulators are being phased out:

 

28 minutes ago, SteveW said:

The addon installation methods employed by older flight simulators are being phased out:

Do you know or hope for this?

Kind regards, Michael

1 minute ago, pmb said:

Do you know or hope for this?

Kind regards, Michael

Know.

10 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Know.

That's definitely a good message! Thank you.

Best regards, Michael

2 hours ago, w6kd said:

I've got 320 add-on airports installed in P3Dv4, and yes, it takes a solid week to rebuild Rome from scratch.

A bunch of those are good working ports from FSX and earlier P3D versions, and their installers will never be updated.  Some of them won't work if moved to a different location.  I don't want to be forced to give up those add-ons.  One of the major strengths in P3D has been its robust backwards compatibility.  I would much prefer that pressure be applied to the noncompliant going forward by their customers, and not through taking a hammer to backwards compatibility...in other words, you can choose to not buy a noncompliant product if xml-based packaging is that important to you. 

I've already migrated most of my old-school addons from scenery.cfg to xml using Lorby-SI's P3D Addon Manager.  Now those can be more easily moved over, but it needs to be emphasized that just moving the xml package to the new sim does not ensure compatibility--when installing into a new sim for which it wasn't originally designed, I will still have to do work to check for compatibility and stability.  For example, we know that LM has updated the base scenery database in P3Dv5...from FSX through P3Dv4 we had the same 2006 base dataset.  Now, with many airports reflecting their more modern state (added runways, navaids, etc) the exclude polygons that are part of most add-on sceneries are potentially not going to match up with the updated airport in the base data, which I expect to lead to things like duplicated navaids and default pavement, buildings and signage peeking through where they're not wanted.  Whether it's installed via xml or scenery.cfg is not going to make a difference when it comes to the work needed to ensure fit and function.

 

 

Dont you think the backwards compatibility is having a negativ influemce on develooment speed bringing the platform forward? 😉