Or flying a B-2 945645609 miles to the target and back. Or flying a F-16 an uneventful hour to the target area, doing an uneventful CAP for half an hour and flying back to base an hour.
Yes, that's also extremely boring!
Thoughts about MSFS 11
- Thread starter Major_Spittle
- Start date
Yes, that's also extremely boring!
srgalahad
Charter Member 2022
I was just reading a blog about Win7 and it really seemed to be applicable here (full text: http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10575). In essence the one segment discussed an 'alternate reality' -- as you read, substitute MSFS or FS for Windows or 'operating system', etc. and adjust the prices accordingly...
"1. Make it the last shrink-wrapped OS
The old way of building and packaging operating systems in shrink-wrapped boxes that are released every few years is just not fast enough or nimble enough to meet the demands to today’s Internet-driven computing environment. It’s also counterproductive for an OS maker because you end up competing against yourself the way XP and Vista are now competing against each other.
There’s only one Windows, and it has merely evolved over time. That’s the message Microsoft needs to drive home by making Windows 7 the last shrink-wrapped version of the OS. From here on out, Microsoft should simply make Windows a constantly evolving platform with new features and functionality enhancements added several times a year through Windows Update.
The business model would be to turn this into a subscription product, albeit a very inexpensive one. As long as you have a current Windows subscription then you can continue to download new features, patches, and updates. If your subscription lapses then Windows still works but you can no longer download the new stuff, or any add-ons, and you can only download highly critical security patches.
For enterprises that are currently using Software Assurance, they are already buying Windows as part of a subscription so there would be no change in the business model for them. For consumers and small businesses who aren’t part of Software Assurance and typically buy Windows from OEMs such as Dell, Toshiba, and Hewlett-Packard, the Windows license that comes with their PC could last for three years and then it’s up to the buyer to pay something like $30-$40/year to renew. For those who want to build their own system, a full version of the OS could cost something like $50-$75 for the first year."
1. a FS Core with simple mapping and limited airports except for one high-detail continent (based on area of sale) and three planes (one 'advanced with VC to whet the appetite) -$15 comes with 3 yr tech subscription (bugfix)
2. Addon scenery to give you the full world (say $5 per continent, $20 for the "world pack"), addon planes from MS for those who can't afford the pricey stuff at $5-10
3. after market aircraft, scenarios and scenery install as now
4. subscription covers not only bugfixes but ongoing map updates, game engine updates and 'hardware compatibility' upgrades (no being behind the curve on a 3 year build cycle)
5. after the original 3 years, license is renewable at ($15/3 yrs)
At some point the user still gets behind the 'power curve' but since the game/sim content has been constantly upgraded it ports over to a new machine with the updates on the same license.
Sure it's a paradigm shift but I think the every-3-years reinvention of the wheel may have run it's course as a result of the speed of advancement on the hardware side. Instead of having to guess the future, the Core gets built to run today (and maybe next year) but gets improved as the drivers, video cards, CPU's all get developed or as the market demands more capabilities.
I'm sure traditional thinking will say it can't work but...
Rob
"1. Make it the last shrink-wrapped OS
The old way of building and packaging operating systems in shrink-wrapped boxes that are released every few years is just not fast enough or nimble enough to meet the demands to today’s Internet-driven computing environment. It’s also counterproductive for an OS maker because you end up competing against yourself the way XP and Vista are now competing against each other.
There’s only one Windows, and it has merely evolved over time. That’s the message Microsoft needs to drive home by making Windows 7 the last shrink-wrapped version of the OS. From here on out, Microsoft should simply make Windows a constantly evolving platform with new features and functionality enhancements added several times a year through Windows Update.
The business model would be to turn this into a subscription product, albeit a very inexpensive one. As long as you have a current Windows subscription then you can continue to download new features, patches, and updates. If your subscription lapses then Windows still works but you can no longer download the new stuff, or any add-ons, and you can only download highly critical security patches.
For enterprises that are currently using Software Assurance, they are already buying Windows as part of a subscription so there would be no change in the business model for them. For consumers and small businesses who aren’t part of Software Assurance and typically buy Windows from OEMs such as Dell, Toshiba, and Hewlett-Packard, the Windows license that comes with their PC could last for three years and then it’s up to the buyer to pay something like $30-$40/year to renew. For those who want to build their own system, a full version of the OS could cost something like $50-$75 for the first year."
1. a FS Core with simple mapping and limited airports except for one high-detail continent (based on area of sale) and three planes (one 'advanced with VC to whet the appetite) -$15 comes with 3 yr tech subscription (bugfix)
2. Addon scenery to give you the full world (say $5 per continent, $20 for the "world pack"), addon planes from MS for those who can't afford the pricey stuff at $5-10
3. after market aircraft, scenarios and scenery install as now
4. subscription covers not only bugfixes but ongoing map updates, game engine updates and 'hardware compatibility' upgrades (no being behind the curve on a 3 year build cycle)
5. after the original 3 years, license is renewable at ($15/3 yrs)
At some point the user still gets behind the 'power curve' but since the game/sim content has been constantly upgraded it ports over to a new machine with the updates on the same license.
Sure it's a paradigm shift but I think the every-3-years reinvention of the wheel may have run it's course as a result of the speed of advancement on the hardware side. Instead of having to guess the future, the Core gets built to run today (and maybe next year) but gets improved as the drivers, video cards, CPU's all get developed or as the market demands more capabilities.
I'm sure traditional thinking will say it can't work but...
Rob
SkippyBing
Charter Member
Not a bad idea, in some ways X-Plane is already running like this, you buy a disc for Version 9 and that allows you to run any subversion from 9.00 to 9.99 as it's upgraded over its development cycle.
The only problem would be when there's a wholesale shift in the underlying engine due to new technologies like the change to multi-core processors or the upcoming Physics cards. However having a new core released every three years or so to take this into account shouldn't be insurmountable.
S
Silver Fox
Guest
Two problems off the top of my head...
1. How do we build add-ons for a constantly shifting target?
2. FS is open-infrastructure, how do you secure it against the kiddies who would want to steal the extra features... without having some nanny-ware constantly watching the program to see that it is all authorized?
It's an interesting idea, but I think that it would work easier for Windows than for FS.
1. How do we build add-ons for a constantly shifting target?
2. FS is open-infrastructure, how do you secure it against the kiddies who would want to steal the extra features... without having some nanny-ware constantly watching the program to see that it is all authorized?
It's an interesting idea, but I think that it would work easier for Windows than for FS.
Interesting...
I see Austin at XP9 going a similar path as Apple, and I see Apple coming up with revolutionary new directions in program interactions, especially towards extreme simplicity of operation.
SilverFox,
I noticed that most all of the very first planes X-Plane has ever had are still in the main package, alongside the newest ones with VC's in them. So I think his platforms will continue (I think) to feature backwards compatability. (He doesnt change his XML code, gauge code, texture formats with each platform release).
Major_Spittle
Charter Member
Thanks Rob.
This is along the same lines as what I was talking about earlier. Releasing the Core FS and continuing development through Add-Ons so people can take the FS in the directions they want.
be that:
Combat
Senery
Sim Airline
Bush Pilot
Weather Realism
Space Flight
.....
The Next Gen FS could hit the market that much earlier and MS and Private developers could look at forums to guage the Demand for future add ons and development.
I have seen the future; and it involves internet downloads up the wazzo! :isadizzy:
srgalahad
Charter Member 2022
I'll preface by saying that I am not a modeler or a programmer ( that ended with DOS 6.0) so I cannot answer, but I suppose I can postulate and let the pros respond
I guess the depends on what the developer is trying to achieve, but I wouldn't think the target would shift all that frequently... tweaks in WinXP (not counting 7 million security patches) haven't been that frequent, and three Service Packs in 6 years for XP is pretty well spaced. Certainly a project with a two year gestation could run afoul of some issues, esp if it was trying to reach past the limits of the current sim... but that happened to FSX projects when Accel was shoved out anyway.
Rob
I guess the depends on what the developer is trying to achieve, but I wouldn't think the target would shift all that frequently... tweaks in WinXP (not counting 7 million security patches) haven't been that frequent, and three Service Packs in 6 years for XP is pretty well spaced. Certainly a project with a two year gestation could run afoul of some issues, esp if it was trying to reach past the limits of the current sim... but that happened to FSX projects when Accel was shoved out anyway.
Uh oh.. can of worms time again... I'm old enough to remember 'dongles' for the Apple II and for some PC software, constant passwords or requiring the HD/CD (gee, sounds like FS9) so it's spitting into the wind to think of anything being theft-proof. Let's not digress there... however, how does MS's Verification tool work? or the updates that require a purchased version of any of the addons (I don't know - I'm just tossing, remember?)
Rob