Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/19/18 in Posts

  1. 51 points
    Indeed but there is a lot that is added so all of that needs to be inserted. Quick update of this week ( I intend to be as offline this weekend as possible). Good progress on bug killing, we now really see the number of things go down and the only 'new' development going on (where new code is made) is on the Immersion module. That one triggers all the. animation and sound effects not directly linked to aircraft systems. For that I did today some sound recordings for the flight attendant that rings the flight deck doorbell (you hear the door chime). Then you check the door cam to see who it is and unlock the door. Moments later you hear the flight attendant saying hi and you'll have your coffee (and no, you will not see the person, just the coffee. We need more graphical power to start animating persons on the flight deck). Stefan also added the last few changes we wanted on the VC. we removed the CRT that hangs from the ceiling at the back (as that function is now in the lower ECAM as you have seen) and the High Altitude button is inserted. Further testing is going on with the TrueGlass and RealLight modules. They are still very GPU memory demanding but we are able to shave off a few MB here and there. After release we need to see if we are forced to make models without these enhancement. The VC itself is very very lean, less memory used than most of the high end aircraft. Remains an item we are closely monitoring. Soon we should have the new sounds from Turbine. These are completely new recordings, not reworked sets of the old files and Christoffer believes they are pretty darned good. This was one of the important dates on the timeline as I really wanted new updated and more accurate sounds. The latest cockpits of the A320 line are much quieter then older and we wanted to make sure we have that right. All in a very good week and we are on the release schedule we agreed upon!
  2. 49 points
    Looong meeting today between devs and project management (aka me). But everybody is more or less happy and we set a release date that I am not going to tell you. So at this moment we are all checking the open issues (what you would call bugs and feature requests) to see what must make it in the 1.0 release, what can be added later and what needs to move to the bigger Service Pack. One thing that we did remove from 1.0 is the Connected Flight Deck as we need that to be 100% stable as it is a big deal for the high end market. For sure it needs an additional 4 weeks after release of 1.0. We have also decide to remove the Connected Flight Deck from the 32 bit version. We feel that is justified as we doen some market research in the people who use that. Those are all high end customers and 90% of this are 64 bits. It also saves us a week or so. Again I like to stress how important this project is for us. It's not only the base for a whole new generation of projects for you readers, but also for a new training platform for flight schools and a 'experience' tools for universities and high schools. Those markets are seriously important for us and we got those contracts signed and waiting for delivery. Certainly the market for high schools with aviation course has exploded in the last 18 months and educational license are a big deal for our sales people. All the demands of all those customers need to be taken into account in this stage of the project as they can't be inserted later. And this is not our 32 bit Airbus in 64 bit format, it is for 75% a totally new product. Last news of the day is that we did some spreadsheeting on how incredibly rich we will get from these products. Okay, how long it will take to pay of the immense costs of development. To do that we need to know what the AVERAGE customer will pay. And looking at the update paths from the three previous versions we guestimated that will be around 29 Euro/Dollar (excluding sales tax that you pay and we don't get). While we do feel that our product can stand on its own against the competition in many aspect (modeling, textures, lighting, animation, MCDU, coverage of aircraft etc etc) it is good to keep that in mind when you compare it with other products. We are not fan of high price add-ons. They create an expectation we feel often can't be matched by what is delivered. And of course we do not spend a penny on DRM and all that nonsense and believe me, that saves a bucket of money. Not having to include malware also helps.
  3. 46 points
    Let me make one comment and then closed that topic. We also fight pirates, pretty serious in fact. We send out take-down notices every single day, have Facebook accounts deleted, have YouTube accounts blocked etc. What we NOT do is break the law and copy malware to the users system. There are laws against that in any civilized country, it is wrong and unethical. It is also VERY damaging to the whole industry as it breaks the trust between customers and companies. How do you think our professional\ customers reacted when they saw articles combining malware, airbus and Prepar3D? We have had customers who cancelled orders, we got many customers asking us if we do something like that. This does not only affected the customers who had malware on their systems, it affects much more people. How do you think Lockheed thinks about it? Sure, everybody knows I am not a fan of FSL. After they sold their product with parts of our copyrighted content in it (for weeks, even after I discussed it with them), there is no love lost. But facts are facts. Laws have been broken again. I do not understand how anybody can defend those actions. It has nothing to do with the fact we both do Airbusses. A product that is three times as expensive as ours will not affect us much. We aim for a large market, not the small top end of the market. So we also fight pirates, I am well know for doing so, but always within the boundaries of the law. And we also do not feel that DRM should make life hard for paying customers. You bought the files, so you can do with them what you want as long you do not share them with others. Install on all your systems, install 50 times, we don't care. If anybody wants to discuss this any further, use the Radio Chatter forum. Sorry for ranting, I spend so many hours trying to solve issues we have not caused I am still rather upset. To be honest, it is all pretty disgusting. FSL deeply apologize for what they did and that helps. But this ain't over. There are legal proceedings following.
  4. 42 points
    Because the previous topic was old, contained a lot of nonsense etc I decided to make a new one. How many products are this? And what will be the names? Aerosoft A318/A319 Professional Aerosoft A320/A321 Professional Aerosoft A330 Professional The 'Professional' in the title indicates that the product is developed for P3d V4 and partly for the professional market (did you know we sold over 75 educational licenses?). This 64 bit platform is our main development platform and our main market. We are sorry that this might lead to some confusion. In scenery we only use the term 'Professional' for products that are designed for P3d V4 and are ONLY P3D V4 compatible. They are not the same products as the FSX:SP2, FSX:STEAM, P3D V3 versions. For aircraft they basically ARE the same. One product, one buy and you can install as many times on any compatible sim (as long as it is your sim and not that of a friend). In other words, you buy the P3D v4 version and get the FSX:SP2, FSX:STEAM, and P3D V3 version for free. A bit complex, sorry about that. Are these updates of the old version? No, they are fully new builds. The 32 bits versions had some code in it that was close to 7 years old and was holding us back. So we decided to redo a lot of the modules and graphics to modern standards. Around 60% of the modeling and textures are new and more then 75% of the code is new. So they probably are not free updates, right? Indeed. But as always Aerosoft will never charge you double for anything. If we replace 50% of a product the update will only cost you half the new price. I this case it's even better because we if you own the A318/A319/A320/A321 and want the newer versions you will be offered an update price of 16.95 Euro (plus VAT when applicable). If you want the A330 and have any of the older models we might be able to offer you an discount as well, not 100% sure on that. The full versions will cost just under 50 Euro. Bundles will be updatable for 24.95 Euro (plus VAT when applicable. Of course prices can always change. DRM? Online activation? Of course not. You paid for the files and can do with them (on your own systems) as you want. Feel free to install 20 times or on all of your own computers. As long as you do not share it with anybody else we're fine with it. What platforms is this for? We start with versions for P3D v4.2 (older versions of P3D have a bug that will prevent it to work) and will consider 32 bit versions as long as that makes commercial sense. To be honest the 32bit platform sales are drying up pretty fast and we do believe we got a good product for that platform at this moment. No decision will be made any time soon on that. What hardware is needed? We advise the same as Lockheed Martin does for it's simulator. As always things will 'run' at the required hardware and will run best at the advised hardware. We do know that the combination of P3d V4.2 and TrueGlass seems very demanding on GPU memory. Other products released at this moment seem to confirm this and we are monitoring that. We are not worried about that right now and are discussing it with de developers. Wingflex? On the smaller busses not (we simply have never seen the high frequency very small movements of the wings done well, they are remarkably stiff wings) and adding it just adds a load of complexity and development cost. Of course the A330 has wingflex, it has much larger and much less stiff wings When? We are not sure where we will be ready for a download release (a boxed release will always be later) because there are a lot of variables that we have little control over. We had some rather serious delays due to bugs in the simulator and we added 6 weeks to implement TrueGlass and RealLight, all not originally planned in our early 2018 release plan. However (and I am writing this Feb 21st) we are closing down code and testing is in high gear. While the dates are not clear, we do have a good idea what will happen after we get the first product online. It's not months away though. Please do not ask every few hours when it will be released as we will always refer you back to this post. A318/A319 Professional 14 days after A318/A319 Professional release A320/A321 Professional 5 weeks later A318/A319 Professional & A320/A321 Profession service Pack 1 This Service pack will replace the current PFD and ND with newer version that are better in resolution and designed to be used in 2d mode (the other gauges should already work in 2d mode at that time) Unknown period later, but we guestimate something like 4 weeks. A330 Professional Unknown period latert 318/A319 Professional & A320/A321 Professional & A330 Professional service Pack 2 Note we skip the A330 SP1 to keep the names uniform. This service pack will bring all aircraft to the same status and will update the smaller busses with the knowledge gathered in the meantime. After this we'll most likely add more A330 models (more engine types etc). Of course, we'll always do hotfixes as soon as they are more or less stable. We promise not to keep them on our systems waiting for a larger update. Decisions on updates of the 32 bit version has not been taken. We feel that the models we know have are highly competitive in their price range and downloads for the 32 bit platform have tanked totally. When we get to that moment in time we'll look at it again. Please do not ask about this right now as I am not going to say anything else then that we'll look at it after point 5. How updates are handled and at what price is listed in the first post on every page. We'll announce deals on the bundle this week. But don't worry, they will be as sweet as our other update options. The DC8 should be out before you fly busses. But that one is pretty close, such a lovely aircraft. So how does it look? Well we think it looks pretty spiffing. We used the very latest technology to make sure this 'base' product stays viable for some time. Here are some of the latest images from our development team (do see them at max resolution) Got a question? It's almost sure that anything you could ask has already been replied to on these forums. So do everybody a favor and use the search option of the forum before asking what has been asked and replied to several times. That way you won't even have to wait for the anwer! Do not hesitate to ask anything or to suggest something! Hey, why is my post removed? To keep these topics 'topical' we do clean them out every few days. Of course we love to read 'oh my god that is beautiful' but it does not really help the topic. So please do post it but don't be angry when it deleted a few days later. As this forum and certainly this section, is part of our marketing, we are rather strict on content. We have no problems discussing things even if it makes us feel; uncomfortable as long as it is written with respect and is on topic. There are hundreds of forums where we are not the moderators and where rants and raves are very welcome. Heck we know some where they are the norm! Just stay on topic, stay respectful and when you really feel the need to bait somebody, bait me. I get paid to eat stuff, no other moderator, developer, or customer is. I am fair game, they are not.
  5. 38 points
    In the weekly meeting (a day late because I was lazy) we had some serious discussion on framerates (always on our minds), some standard stuff about progress (never fast enough) and we made a decision on how to handle MCDU 3. As you remember we now use the second MCDU for options and settings but we were never happy about that. In the new models the A320 and A330 series will have two completely independent MCDU's. In the A330 the third one will be the setting and options we now have in the A320 series. But for the A320 series the third (settings and options) 'MCDU' will be a 2d panel that can be called up as 2d panel using keys or a click zone. As this will look like a real MCDU in the A330 we decided to keep it looking like that in the A320 as well. 1. Activate keyboard input (to align with other addons the LSK's now are usable with F1...F12, see that we do listen to suggestions? ) 2. Opens the 'real' MCDU as a 2D panel 3. Opens the third 'settings and options' MCDU 2d panel. So this is how it will look in the A320 series.
  6. 37 points
    As you say, anything between two weeks and two months (oh you did not say that?).... In the end it all depends on what we feel HAS to be in 1.00, We'll warn people who buy early that we still have 4 people working on the code. But good news is that we now have a long overdue updater in the works that will be used for the busses. Work in progress! For us this is a bit more complex than for other companies as we got to implement 200+ addons and not a handful like for example my buddies at PMDG. But next week all beta testers will be moved from updates via SVN to this system so we can test it in depth.
  7. 34 points
    Some shot of my latest testflight from EDDM to LSZH:
  8. 34 points
    Of course modeling has to advance the system coding so Stefan has today done the last bits on the A321 and now jumped back on the A330. The last bit he done was to update the new LH model (with some different windows, new livery and or course the sat wart).
  9. 32 points
  10. 30 points
  11. 30 points
    A small update from what is going on behind the curtain. I often get the question of what is and what is not simulated in our Airbus. The fact we focus on day to day operation seems to distract a lot of you, thinking we would fake all the numbers and not provide any systems simulation. That's simply not true. Mathijs wrote some extensive post about what is going on behind the screens already and with this post I would also like to add a bit of background information. Two weeks ago we introduced the new electric system developed for the A330 into the A318 test aircraft. This was a major step forward in the development as it showed us whether our ideas behind the new systems developed over the past two years work or not. The good news: They work very well within the scope of the possible troubles that were to be expected. The "other" news: There were of course a few issues popping up, however nothing big that could delay the release. One of those "issues" however was that the blue hydraulic system did not work. Often people seem to think we would only animate the lights on the knobs, however let me show you this picture from a rejected takeoff test I did (and ignore myself not being exactly on the centerline ;))
  12. 30 points
    I have no idea how widespread this is, but as it was rather crude and depended on the user disabling his AV software it can't be used a lot. We do not use any DRM on our FS add-ons. No online activation, no online check at all. You can install as many times and on as many systems (as long as you own them) as you want. Piracy happened but we think trusting people is a first step to reducing piracy. Not installing illegal malware that collects your usernames and passwords. Everybody in this industry is hurt by this event. Trust comes on foot and leaves on horseback.
  13. 26 points
    Yes, she will knock, you have to open the door etc. And you will even SEE the coffee. We really want to bring the cockpit to life Also note the briefing documents between the throttle levers. That's where all pilots put them when the are preparing.
  14. 21 points
    I think we can resume with A330 images in a few weeks.
  15. 20 points
  16. 19 points
  17. 18 points
    Sure thing! I'll post some more when I've finished up the details around the terminal area.
  18. 18 points
    @Mathijs Kok Any chance for a small Tuesday update?
  19. 18 points
    All our initial release come with fully up to date AIRACs so if it is released in October 2019 it will include an October 2019 AIRAC. The deal we have with Lufthansa data systems allows us to do so. No other add-on company has the same.
  20. 18 points
    I am closing this topic for a few hours to update the starter topic and to insert some new information. Don't worry, all good news!
  21. 17 points
    Ahh well if you feel we are not even in the ballpark of reality, I think that no matter what we do we;ll never be able to satisfy a person with advanced knowledge as you clearly have. It could simply be that this is not a product for you. No problem, we can't satisfy everybody with every product. You clearly are not very interested in the cockpit as a working environment and more in the working fo the systems. For us those are a tool, not the goal. We want to simulate flying an Airbus, not an Airbus. To do so we need a good aircraft and we believe we have. Our MCDU (which we feel is extremely important) for example is far more complete than any of our competitors. Also the fact we feel that a two person cockpit is one of our express goals makes our product rather realistic in our eyes. Flying an Airbus in your own is totally unrealistic, removes a large part of what makes a pilot (crew coordination). It's like using the building ATC, no serious simmer does that as it is silly and unrealistic. If you only see the simulator as 'systems simulator' that you can experiment with that makes sense. If you use it to simulate what pilots do it is serious flawed. However we have explained many times what has changed or redone in the parts you mention. It could be you missed those posts. It should be easy to find those with a search.
  22. 17 points
    Yes, soon. Depends a bit on your definition of 'soon' of course, but I am not unhappy with progress at this moment. Hundreds of small issue are being sorted out and a dozens of test flights are being done every day. But to be clear, even I have no idea when things will be 'good enough' for a download release (for boxed we always need pretty stable code). For sure it is not in the next two weeks of so. All the discussion on the release date is pretty tiresome to be honest. It does not bring it any closer and it seems to upset some people. It would be best if we don't discuss it until I have set a date. What I will do is rewrite the opening post as that also seems to confuse people. My bad.
  23. 16 points
  24. 16 points
    Seriously a down-vote for asking for an update after the weekly PM meeting?
  25. 16 points
    Reading your post I assume that you are an experienced rw pilot with several thousand flying hours on the A320 family so that you can judge in what area the Aerosoft Airbus is not in the ball park of reality. So we would be happy to get some valuable input from you as a rw pilot.
  26. 16 points
    No need for that. Since FSL advised people to disable AV software to be able to install malware on the users system it is clear that we can't do that anymore and yesterday we decided to remove that from our installers and from our advise to customers. This will make life harder for customers and support, but there simply is no way to avoid that. I explained that yesterday in this post: And if you feel that speaking out in a negative tone when another company willingly installs malware on a users system is bad form, we differ in opinion.
  27. 15 points
    We are aiming for a solid 7FPS if you have the latest hardware and put all the sliders full left.
  28. 15 points
    All our initial release come with fully up to date AIRACs so if it is released in March 2018 it will include a March 2018 AIRAC. And yes the old (better looking) LH livery is included.
  29. 15 points
  30. 14 points
    Slowly items move from left to right on this page.... Things are going well right now. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A quick word on the VRAM requirements that were discussed early last week. We have done extensive tests and we are now 100% sure that our new model and VC use only 10 Mb more memory then the previous model even though it is far more detailed, simply because it is is more efficient. Under 200 Mb in total. Pretty high for Fs2004 standards (we did aircraft in 32 Mb then) but you get a lot of details for that and more or less in line with the aircraft from other add-on developers that will be coming on the market this year. So absolutely no problem there. However TrueGlass tripled that VRAM demand and thus gets us in problems when flying with graphics cards that have limited memory in combination with demanding environments. The release of Mad Dog last week showed the same (even far more serious) and the developers have responded with offering a version that does not use TrueGlass and that makes the product fully usable for most users. We are currently talking to the developers of TrueGlass to understand why it uses such large amounts of memory. It could very well be this can be changed. They are pretty good developers and super nice people so I got good hope a solution is found. As I kept on saying, it's not something that worries me. It is however to a certain degree out of our hands While doing these test we did find one great thing. P3d V4.2 is capable of using ALL the VRAM memory you can throw at it. We have seen situation where it used 11 Gb on a 1080 card. P3d V4.1 never got that high. Now contrary to what many people believe, this is a good thing. Unused memory is totally wasted memory. You might as well not have it. And as long as the swapping when it runs out is done well using every byte is perfect. What is clear is that P3d V4.2 loves memory, both on your motherboard and on your graphics card! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last item of the day, we decided to add a HIGH ALT LANDING Button to the overhead. Now you can spend a few minutes googling what that button does!
  31. 14 points
    Monday morning I am going to clean a lot of posts here, don't be alarmed if your posts is gone. If it is a serious question or something like that it will stay. The culling has nothing to do with what we like or do not like here, just an attempt to keep the topic short so people can find answers. Don't let it stop you from posting!
  32. 14 points
    Hey, guys, let me try to help with the timeline thing. Sorry to say it's still not as clear as it could be. I think there are some language disconnects at work. Try this version... Not intended as a criticism, just a clarification... coming from someone who was initially among the confused. I do this kind of thing for a living (writing, corporate communications) - and can't contribute to the community in too many other ways, I'm not a pilot or a repainter or anything along those lines. Hope this is something that I can contribute... and that it turns out to be helpful.
  33. 13 points
    The brother of a friend from a guy I know at work, who is dating my sister, said it was 92,86% yesterday.
  34. 13 points
    Mainly because when shit should hit the fan it will haunt me for months. People get sick, people have accidents. By saying we got a date I only wanted to show that we now see the end of the project.
  35. 13 points
    These things have not added a second to the development process as these graphical things were ahead of the systems development. But even if it were not I would still have decided to implement them. We wanted to make the cockpit as realistic as possible. Not as in a museum, all clean and polished, but as a real pilot sees it. As a real pilot uses it. if you want a product that simulates the systems there are other options, we want to simulate being a pilot. Or to as I said yesterday, we do not really care about things in the many system that have NEVER happened in a real Airbus or things that happened every few million hours (if you want realism you will have to fly for years and years before seeing a moderate failure and for decades and decades to see some serious. We do care about the things that happen several times a day in every cockpit.
  36. 13 points
    "Feature question": Will there be a Chrome password extractor in the Aerosoft installer für P3Dv4 like in "the other company's" Airbus installer?
  37. 12 points
    We classify our Bugs upon entering it in the Management Software. Show Stopper, Major, Minor,... Often the tester decides the severity of it. Many things are "cosmetics" like shifted fonts at panels. Some regard to system behaviour. Some to details like ECAM Arrows or ND and PFD symbology. Me for myself am mostly looking for technical behaviour. Means: are the switches in their system-wise state and how is the power-up, engine start, Delay-Behaviour and suggestions for improvement and features. These suggestions for example might be discussed and maybe delayed until the Service Pack. All these 200+ are broadly something from everything. The major advantage of AS is, that we are a variety of different persons. Some from Aviation (Pilots AKA Franks, Technicians AKA Bens, ATC Controller, soontobe's AKA Emis), some are IT-Neets (Hans, Stefan,...) and some are just Simmers. Therefore we have a wide variety in different Computer-Platforms with different Specifications. And that creates alot of findings but building a good and a decent priced Product. What adds "delay" (not to regard a release but to work generally) is that we are all working poeple besides this. At least some of us "work".....Work.....it's a strange word. Nevermind^^ And what I have to say is: That the new bus will be a nice Aircraft
  38. 12 points
    No, we have really looked at those options but in such a high res environment something that is not 'as good' looks horrible. And humans are trained to detect problems with human figures so issue are always very obvious. To make it look good you need at least 10000 polygons and 15 Mb of textures. Now as a static object that 'might' be okay for a user with a 1080Ti card but when you start to animate that the load on the GPU explodes. Look at this: That's a 3d model, fully rigged, very usable. Costs a few hundred dollar, peanuts if you think it would costs 20 times more to redo it. But thats 25.000 polygons. There is simply no way you can show something like that close up in animation inside the sim. Even a dedicated game engine with very limited sightlines, flat earth etc etc will be pushed. I find it always strange people want floppy wings and complain if the font of something is not 100% correct when they are willing to overlook that empty seat on the right. Taking off or landing in an airliner without a second person is something only happens when the other pilot is incapacitated and would count as a very serious emergency. For every new project we experiment with filling that seat, but to this date it simply can't be done as we want it. And I hate it.
  39. 12 points
    I think that is the root of the problem here. This thread is not meant for „making conversation“. It is meant for us to give preview information concerning the AS Airbusses and for the members to ask questions about it. I think I understand your sense of „humor“ but it really does not add any value here. You act, to me, like you are the smartest kid in class and make up „difficult/provoking“ questions for the headteacher to show the other kids how smart you think you are. Please stop that and ask straight genuine questions of you have them. Thanks
  40. 12 points
    Can you spill the coffee and create failures? http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/01/05/faa.flight.diverted/ Peter
  41. 12 points
    Please do NOT vote a post like this down. It is not incorrect, it is not abusive or offensive!
  42. 12 points
    We are actually somewhere between 90.5% and 90.6% at this moment.
  43. 12 points
    Aerosoft should really post a fun statistics at the date of release like how many times the release date was being asked in the forums, how many posts overall where posted in all threads belonging to the 2018 busses etc. That would be so awesome and interesting.
  44. 11 points
    Sure, it's a standard texture. I played around with the idea of picking a dynamic image from the net so the newspaper would be up to date every flight. But the developers just looked at me sadly and went on to work on actual useful stuff. They ignore my wild plans a lot actually.
  45. 11 points
    One and for all to close this discussion: It has not been said that the A330 for 32bit has been cancelled. It was said that the decision on it has been delayed until after the 64bit release. We are a company with many full time employees and as such we need to make profit to be able to pay our bills. We can't do anything where we loose a lot of money on. Two years ago a version for fsx would have been a no brainer. Things changed with the P3Dv4 release and most customers shifting to that plattform and thus we have to go with time. If the market analysis after the 64bit release shows that a 32 bit version would loose us a lot of money then we won't do it. If the market analysis shows we can still make a profit with it we will most certainly do it. If it shows we might loose a little bit of money with it we might even do it as a favor to the community so to say in order not to disappoint you. If it it predicts major losses due to a lack of customers then we simply can't do it anymore. Promise us, let's say, 10.000 sales and you can be 100% sure we will do it. Even with half as much we still might do it. With less it might become hard. This is the final statement on the topic of the 32bit A330 decision.
  46. 11 points
    I'm going to do something very rare for me, and add to what Mathijs has said. I'm only doing this because Mathijs and I share a common professinonal background as technical program managers. One thing which is rarely ever discussed in flight sim forums is the very large financial investment it takes to research, formulate a plan, create a product, test a product, set up the marketing, and bring the product to market. Now of course there is risk in any "investment", so before taking that risk a company will research the outcome of that investment. In this case this would be "Market Research". Right now the flight sim world is in the mist of a yet another significant change. I say "another" change because we've seen this several times before with the release of new sims over many years (for instance FS2004 to FSX), though nothing quite as significant as we're all witnessing right now. Not only is the 64-bit flight sim is a true line of demarcation for the future of desktop flight simulation, but we now have three 64-bit sims (P3DV4, FS World, and X-Plane), leaving really only one 32-bit sim (FSX). To be quite honest, the writing has been on the wall for this for many years, but that doesn't really matter. What matters is the Aerosoft and other developers have to be confident that a well made and produced product will not loose money, but also allow them to regain their investment plus profit - and that profit goes to paying the bills, salaries of employees, and financing future products. In a way, the decision to proceed with a 32-bit version of the Airbus is really not up to Aerosoft. If the market is there (if there are enough people using FSX who will purchase the Airbus) then Aerosoft will produce it. If there aren't enough people, then Aerosoft can not, as a financial loss of that magnitude would not only affect Aerosoft but other future development. Please don't take this to mean that the 32-bit Airbus has been cancelled - anything but! When the time is right, Aerosoft will perform the market research (which is really always ongoing) and figure out the cost of converting a 64-bit software product to 32-bit. If it makes sense financially, then that's what will happen. In a large part, it's just up to how many people are still using FSX and how many of those would purchase an updated Airbus verses the cost of creating the aircraft and company operating expenses. On the Program Managment side of things we call this a "cost benefit analysis". What if it doesn't happen? Well, I've been flying the 64-bit version for quite a number of months and I flew the previous version for quite some time as well. While there are some changes, they are very near the same aircraft when you take into consideration the limits of 32-bit simulator. So what Mathijs has been saying all along (32-bit sim users already have an excellent Airbus) is more true than people realize! One way or another I feel sure that the existing 32-bit Airbus will get something. Whether it will be an entirely new product or an update to the existing one is based on the Cost Benefit Analysis. NOTE: I am not speaking for Mathijs or Aerosoft, but giving you a look at how such decisions are made.
  47. 10 points
    bEduard, They broke the law by adding malware to an installer This malware was installed with ALL users, the malware was at least for some time on the users system This malware cracked your browser and collected ALL you passwords and usernames, FSL claimed this was only done when an illegal serial was found, but never was able to proof this The illegally stolen data was send without any protection to FSL servers They told customer to disable AV software to actively hide this fact After they were outed at https://www.reddit.com/r/flightsim/comments/7yh4zu/fslabs_a320_installer_seems_to_include_a_chrome/?st=JDTCGK8E&sh=ab17abb5 They removed the illegal part of the installer They went to great lengths to apologize (refunding customers etc.), They beat about bush a bit, calling it DRM etc but in the end admitting clearly and openly what they did. They admitted violating the law. These are not accusation, not impressions, not interpretations, but cold hard facts. Even FSL does not refute them. The security of your system is extremely important. Because we are a customer of FSL and installed the version with malware we had to assume our systems were compromised and had to change server passwords. We simply could not accept FSL statement that the malware only stole when an illegal serial was found. Doing that would be absolutely irresponsible. We have customer data on our systems (YOUR data) and it was potentially compromised. Every customer who had that installer on his system has to take measures or believe FSL. Seeing the history of FSL we decided to play it save and reset the login data on the servers. Did not make our server peeps happy. But we simply can't take any risk with customers data. Of course we reported the possible intrusion of our systems to authorities. Law requires that when customer data is involved. We would violate the law is we would not report it. Again, I have no idea why you would defend this.
  48. 10 points
    Yes, but the Ram Air Turbine that some people would like to see included has been deployed one single time in over 200 million hours of block time in the A320 series, pilots drink coffee on every single flight. As we want to simulate flying an Airbus and not simulate a Training Simulator (let's be honest, those are multi million dollar bits of software) we feel that it is these kinds of things that are important.
  49. 10 points
    I too was an FSX user as long as there was nothing better. Now for the 1st time with P3Dv4 64bits I can do long haul flights between big addon airports with orbx, activesky and full AI traffic without the fear of an OOM. If you are really involved in Flightsim how can you stick with 8 years old FSX and all his bugs and limitations. I know P3D is not free but if you really like flight simming it is a must have. Also most FSX Airport addons are more or less usable in P3D even freeware addons. The A330 is a long haul aircraft and not matter what you do, you will not be able to perfectly use it in FSX (OOM and CTD); Common guys it is time to move on, FSX is almost dead, P3Dv4 is amazing and in constant evolution for the better, thanks to LM working hard on it hand to hand with major developers like Aerosoft.
  50. 10 points
    And that ends any further comments about that story here in the preview topic.