Phoenix Sim for Linux? Appeal to Runtime Games Ltd.

[nihil]

Hello, my name is nihil, and I'm a Linux user. My first experience with Linux was in the early/mid 90's, after I saw some friends using it. I didn't think it was addictive at the time, but soon found myself using it more and more, and eventually I completely abandoned the mainstream OS culture. And you know what? I like using Linux, and I'm not ashamed to admit it! Yeah, thats right, you heard^H^H^H^H^Hread me right, I like Linux!

But I'm not here to tell you how Linux has changed my life. I'm here to ask Runtime Games Ltd. to offer us, the Linux using part of us, a chance to enjoy their fine RC flight simulator in our native Linux environment.

We have suffered long enough my friends, it is time for our Linux using voices to be heard! Now, not being a stranger to business, I know that numbers talk, so it's numbers I aim to achieve. Accompanying this post is a poll, nothing fancy, a simple yea/nea. By yea'ing, you are indicating an interest in purchasing a copy of the Phoenix flight simulator for Linux, if Runtime Games were to offer it. By nea'ing, you are dooming mankind to viruses, spam, trojan horses, and talking paperclips for all eternity. (please vote seriously)

\x75\x6e\x69\x74\x65!


To Runtime Games directly, should they happen upon this poll: Please do not take my lighthearted approach to this poll as an indication that this plea should not be taken seriously. I am sincerely interested in a Linux port of Phoenix, and I am confident that there are others who are interested as well. Hopefully, the poll results will indicate as such.

[pldaniels]

I'm in for it.

Somehow though, I'm not sure they'll ever make it - simply because I suspect they'll be using DirectX as apposed to OpenGL :( Perhaps they should use the Doom3 engine :D

Paul

[nullie]

Definetly there must be one. PhoenixRC is like my only application requiring windows. So, I'm training at work. I'd rather buy another copy of phoenix than windows.

[nihil]

Dear skirtz (nea'er and affiliate of Clearview sim),

Does your vote of "no" indicate that SVK is working on a Linux port of Clearview? The only other motivation I could see for a vote of no on your part would be to deny Runtime Games potential sales of Phoenix, but I certainly hope it's the former.

To be honest, I had never even heard of you or Clearview until this morning, but the offer extends to you and SVK Systems as well. If you port your sim to Linux, I will buy a copy. Heck, for $30, even if it sucks it's not a huge loss. ;)

[skirtz]

My vote means exactly what the poll asks for: Am I interested in purchasing piece of software for Linux - and my choice is "No" - I have no Linux system. Too bad you heard for ClearView after you spend too much $$$ - you could save a lot and get a better sim.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[nihil]

My vote means exactly what the poll asks for: Am I interested in purchasing piece of software for Linux - and my choice is "No" - I have no Linux system. Too bad you heard for ClearView after you spend too much $$$ - you could save a lot and get a better sim.

Stefan
http://spam

Have you read a single word of this thread?

[bilboa]

Like the original poster, I've used Linux at home almost exclusively since the early 90s. I've finally gotten tired of having to spend days trying to get all my different hardware features to work correctly with each new laptop or linux distro I use; it just stopped being as fun for me as it used to. So my most recent purchase was a MacBook Pro. No more Linux, so I voted no. I'm still rooting for linux from the sidelines, but I personally wouldn't buy a copy.

Honestly, I don't think you can find nearly enough willing buyers of a Linux version to make it worth Runtime Games' effort to create a Linux port. I'd start a similar poll for a Mac port, but again I realize that when Macs only make up under 2% of the desktop market, it can't possibly be worth their time to create a Mac port. I just use BootCamp and Windows to run Phoenix on my Mac.

[LouieB]

I voted no for the simple reason that after using various flavors of Linux on and off over the years I have grown tired of having high end systems, printers and other equipment that were a PITA to get to work with Linux. Linux is not ready for Prime Time, bottom line. I wish it were otherwise, but the truth remains that Linux is not a viable solution for the masses and therefore it will always be lacking for software.

[nihil]

I'll agree that Linux is not for the inexperienced. However, in recent years it has become much easier for someone with only moderate experience to enjoy it, vs. the "hardcore geek" requirements of years before.

I personally have had no hardware compatability problems in the past 3-5 years (that I can think of anyway). Before that yes, there were some issues, but this is 2007. My mobile devices are all recognized, all the cameras I have tried work great (except a $9.99 special I found at the grocery store, but it didnt work in windows either), all the video cards have had on par performance for their specs, printers work fine, even my 10 channel 24bit "semi-pro" recording studio soundcard works flawlessly. I also use it to develop for, and program little microcontrollers (still learning), write tools for my job, and as soon as I pick up some voltage regulators it'll also be used as the brain on a robot (24V system -> 12V and 5V input required).

The only area that I have found Linux to be lacking is games/sims, and I run several win32 games under emulation with no problems at all. Unfortunately, none of the sims I have tried are willing to emulate.

As for the number of people using Linux on the desktop, its growing at a rather impressive rate. I remember when I used to be "special" :rolleyes: because I was the odd one who ran the strange OS. These days, I know lots of people who dont use Linux, but they almost certainly know someone else who does (other than myself). The numbers are probably greater than you think.

[bilboa]

I'll agree that Linux is not for the inexperienced. However, in recent years it has become much easier for someone with only moderate experience to enjoy it, vs. the "hardcore geek" requirements of years before.


What you say is true, but it hasn't gone far enough to be mainstream. My basic test is the "mom test". Is Linux to the point where I'd consider recommending that my mom's next computer run Linux? The answer would still be a resounding NO. Sure if I set it up for her, it's perfectly easy these days to just turn the computer on and have it boot into Gnome or KDE, and click on the web browser or email icon. However I'd still have to help her anytime she needed to do any maintenance, or install anything. With her Mac she can handle it herself most of the time. Until that's true of Linux, it's not mainstream in my opinion.


I personally have had no hardware compatability problems in the past 3-5 years (that I can think of anyway).


Do you run Linux on a laptop, and if so did suspend to RAM and suspend to disk work for you out of the box? Having a laptop that I can't suspend really diminishes its usefulness IMO. After spending literally days worth of time fiddling with different kernel patches, I got one of my laptops to suspend to disk, but I never got one that successfully suspends to RAM. I know it works for some laptops, but you have to get lucky or do your research before you buy. And what about adjusting screen brightness, getting your builtin wireless to work, etc? All can be made to work, but not without a bit of work which would be beyond the average computer end-user.

For my most recent laptop upgrade I decided I was over thinking it was fun to spend time fiddling with getting stuff to work, so I was between buying a "Linux laptop" from one of the companies that sells laptops with Linux already setup with hardware that Linux supports, or a new Mac. I finally decided that even with a "Linux laptop", I'd still have to go through the same hassles to get my Palm T5 and iPod to work nicely under Linux. Meanwhile, with the Ports and Fink package systems for OS/X, I can easily get most of the development tools I'm accustomed to having on my Mac anyways.

[LouieB]

I personally have had no hardware compatability problems in the past 3-5 years (that I can think of anyway).


Sometimes it is not always a compatability problem, without a doubt driver support for Linux is far better now than what it was years ago.

I think that one of the larger issues now for Linux and I will use myself as an example, is not that it has a driver that will support my Canon Pixma iP6600D but the fact that Windows compatability Canon utilities that come with the printer are not to be found with the Linux distro. In short the best I can generally hope for is basic printer functions.

Is that a Linux problem, well .... not really. That is an issue with Canon not deciding to support various Linux releases that are available and therein lies the gist of the problem for many users.

Unfortunantly, Novel, a company that has just about put themselves in the crapper, is not doing much better with their release of SUSE. Novel just does not understand what they need to do to move SUSE into the mainstream.

As mentioned by another, it has to pass the 'mom' test and at the present Linux is falling short of passing my 'mom' test. I wish it were otherwise.

[nihil]

I agree, its not for everyone, and no, I wouldnt recommend it for my mother (she still cant program a VCR), but my 68 year old father recently got his first taste of Linux via Knoppix live-CD, and in his own words "This is a lot easier than you made it out to be kid". And that included walking him through a manual install of an updated Firefox using a USB key for file storage.

And yes, I currently have Linux on 4 laptops, one being my mail server, which actually took some fiddling to prevent it from suspending on its own. The other three (regular use, backup, and phased out relic) all suspend to RAM properly. In the past, I have run Linux successfully on laptops from Dell, Toshiba, IBM, Compaq, and Acer.

As much as I would love to debate the values of Linux with you guys, this thread is not about Linux for the masses. We all know it isnt. This thread is about asking software vendors for a Linux version of their RC flight simulators. I know our numbers are small, but I'd say there are enough of us out there who would buy a copy of Phoenix to at least break even with the cost in development it would take to port it.

(Honestly though, can your mothers successfully perform installation, configuration, and troubleshooting actions on any other OS? Thats why they keep calling us, remember?)

[bilboa]

As much as I would love to debate the values of Linux with you guys, this thread is not about Linux for the masses. We all know it isnt. This thread is about asking software vendors for a Linux version of their RC flight simulators. I know our numbers are small, but I'd say there are enough of us out there who would buy a copy of Phoenix to at least break even with the cost in development it would take to port it.

The question of whether Linux is for the masses is directly related to whether Runtime Games would have a chance of making a profit on a port to Linux. They're not in it for charity or open source evangelism, so just breaking even wouldn't be enough incentive for them to do the port, they have to be able to make money on it.

I take your point that the average Phoenix buyer might be more computer literate than my mom, though she's worked as a secretary and paralegal for years using computers since the MS-DOS days, so she's not really computer illiterate either. She's just, like the majority of computer users, not really interested in the nuts and bolts of computers, she just wants to use them to do useful things. What keeps Linux from being a good choice for people like her is that even now it requires more nuts-and-bolts computer knowledge to use and manage than OS/X or Windows.

[nihil]

The question of whether Linux is for the masses is directly related to whether Runtime Games would have a chance of making a profit on a port to Linux. They're not in it for charity or open source evangelism, so just breaking even wouldn't be enough incentive for them to do the port, they have to be able to make money on it.

It does not have to be "for the masses" to be profitable. Phoenix retails for $80GBP, which is about $154USD at the current exchange rate. Even if only 100 copies of Phoenix for Linux were to be sold, thats $15,400USD. The average developer makes about $40USD/hour last I checked, which would give them 384 "developer hours" to port it. Seeing as how the bulk of the work was done when the sim was written for win32, I don't think it would take more than 200 of those hours to make the port happen. This leaves $7360 (assuming 100 units sold), figure in 30% for overhead, packaging, and distribution, it's still a profit of more than $5,000USD. And I'd certainly think that five-thousand bucks is a better profit than zero-thousand bucks.

I know the math here is pretty vague, but it should at least demonstrate that it doesnt have to be "for the masses" to make a profit. Nor does it have to be about charity or open source evangelism (notice how I did *not* ask them to release their source code?). It's about offering your product to as many people as possible, and I feel this applies to an OSX port as well, though realistically an OSX version would likely outsell a Linux version. Chances are, over its lifetime, there will be more than 100 copies sold for any platform.

[bilboa]

I can see you don't work in software development by the fact that you think a large graphics-intensive Windows program like Phoenix can be ported to Linux in 200 hours. I'd guess closer to 2,000 hours if they're lucky, unless they've written it from the start with multi-platform portability in mind. Anyway, I'd like to be proven wrong. I'd buy a Mac port now, and a year ago I'd have bought a Linux port and voted yes in this poll.

I am aware that you weren't suggesting Runtime Games should open source Phoenix. What I meant was, it seemed to me that you were implying that creating a Linux port should be enough of a reward in itself, that even just breaking even on the venture would be reason enough to do it.

[skirtz]

....The average developer makes about $40USD/hour last I checked......


nihil,

Developers for realtime simulators can be hired for $40 USD/hour - ? You may have hard time getting someone who knows his stuff for less than $100 and still not get the work done. If it was that easy, there will be 20 to a 100 simulators and all will be selling under $20. It is hard, complcated and very expencive. How about testing on multiple configurations (that someone have to build and have expertize into), documentation and ongoing support? How about packaging and creating new distribution line that is for Linux? Who will agree to keep inventory and sell it for that low volume? This is not to shoot your ideas down, just some real life consideration that make all this impossible to ever happen.

Stefan

[nihil]

I can see you don't work in software development by the fact that you think a large graphics-intensive Windows program like Phoenix can be ported to Linux in 200 hours. I'd guess closer to 2,000 hours if they're lucky, unless they've written it from the start with multi-platform portability in mind. Anyway, I'd like to be proven wrong. I'd buy a Mac port now, and a year ago I'd have bought a Linux port and voted yes in this poll.

You are correct, in that I do not work in software development. Not in a context that would apply to porting a sim anyway. I have ported windows applications to Linux in the past (as well as Linux->win32), and I do write some code for work, but I am not "a developer". Not too long ago I spoke to a developer that used to work at Loki Software, whose primary business was porting win32 games to Linux. He indicated that the bulk of development time in games (and I would assume applies to sims) is just getting the base framework laid out to interact with the graphics/object/etc.. datafiles. The actual porting of the engines was not that bad from what I was told. While its true they closed in 2001, the number of Linux users has grown exponentially in the past 6 years, and I'd imagine if they were to try the same thing today, it would be a success. With the new windows "vista" getting such bad reviews right out of the starting gate, people are going to consider alternatives like OSX and even Linux, so the timing is right if nothing else.


Developers for realtime simulators can be hired for $40 USD/hour - ? You may have hard time getting someone who knows his stuff for less than $100 and still not get the work done.


With all the third-world outsourcing in the past 5 years, good developers, in both the US and UK, are getting much cheaper to come by.

[johnckendall]

I would pay $400 for a copy of Phoenix or ClearView if it ran on Linux! ;-)
I'm not kidding either.

(And I already own both of them)
(And I _am_ a software engineer and no you cannot get expert engineers that cheap)

[skirtz]

I got customer reports that ClearView runs on Mac -and- Linux using Parallels.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[nihil]

I got customer reports that ClearView runs on Mac -and- Linux using Parallels.

Stefan


That isn't running on Mac -or- Linux. That's running on win32, that is running in a virtual machine, that is running on Mac or Linux. You would still have to purchase a copy of the M$ trash to run a sim in that environment, and -any- sim will run under those conditions.

In case you missed it, the entire point of this thread is about -not- having to purchase a copy of windows to get a decent sim.

[skirtz]

If you can run a given piece of software on Macs and Linux using Parallels, there is no incentive whatsoever to invest development resources into making "native" version.

The point is, it is transparent enough to the end user so it does not make any difference. It may not be the same for you, but you are mostly alone. You are splitting hair and that is not productive nor will ever make you happy, so why bother.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[bilboa]

I've been using VMware for years, and am a big fan of virtualization software, but running most apps under VMware or Parallels is not transparent, and CPU and especially graphics intensive programs usually perform worse, sometimes much worse, under VMs, or don't work well. Take flight sims for instance. Neither VMware nor Parallels supports DirectX 9, so Phoenix and RealFlight, or any other flight sim or game that requires DirectX 9 won't work at all currently. You don't say how well ClearView performs under Parallels, but if you take a look at the Parallels forums after the 3.0 release, almost all reports even of the games that do work say they run much slower, sometimes unacceptably so, under Parallels. So I don't think that part of your argument is valid, Skirtz, at least not with the current state of virtualization software.

I think the main reason most Windows software doesn't get ported to Mac or Linux is simply because the market is too small, not because running most software under a VM is an adequate substitute.

[skirtz]

The market is small and good virtual software makes it even smaller. The performance issue at some point becomes irellevant, who cares if the sim frame rate is 399 or 299.

[nihil]

If you can run a given piece of software on Macs and Linux using Parallels, there is no incentive whatsoever to invest development resources into making "native" version.
Wrong.


The point is, it is transparent enough to the end user so it does not make any difference. It may not be the same for you, but you are mostly alone. You are splitting hair and that is not productive nor will ever make you happy, so why bother.
Wrong again. It is nowhere close to transparent, and again, you have ignored the point of the thread. To remind you, the point of the thread is sims that do *NOT* require the use of microsoft products. If that is too difficult for you to understand, spam elsewhere.


Stefan
spam

[skirtz]

Ok, ok,.... you are right. Ports to Linux will follow soon.... Because you said so. Stay Microsoft free and wait for the ports. Sure. Sound like good strategy to me. Did you get Runtime Games to respond? Post the response once you get one, I would like to see it.

Stefan

[bilboa]

The market is small and good virtual software makes it even smaller. The performance issue at some point becomes irellevant, who cares if the sim frame rate is 399 or 299.

Boy you're stubborn. Many graphics intensive games run horribly under VM software. It's not just a matter of small performance differences that you can only notice by running a benchmark as you seem to be implying, they're pretty much unplayable, if they'll run at all. Virtualization software does a pretty good job of efficiently sharing the CPU between OSes, but not so good at sharing peripherals such as video cards or USB ports.

I agree with your larger point that it's unlikely that lots of commercial Windows software will get ported to Linux or OS X unless they become a larger part of the desktop market, but it's not because VM software makes native ports unnecessary, especially for graphics intensive programs like games. Most such programs simply don't work well, or at all, under VMware or Parallels.

[skirtz]

I am software developer and as such can tell you that Open GL is Open GL and good VM software will make the performance difference minimal. But I am not going to argue, because in threads like this the reason is unwanted guest.

Cheers,
Stefan

[bilboa]

I am software developer and as such can tell you that Open GL is Open GL and good VM software will make the performance difference minimal. But I am not going to argue, because in threads like this the reason is unwanted guest.

Cheers,
Stefan

I'm a software developer as well, what's your point? I've also been using VMware regularly for the last 6 or 7 years, and Parallels more recently, and have tried lots of programs under them. It's just an empirical fact that many graphics intensive games perform very poorly or don't run at all under these VM programs. For instance Phoenix RC, RealFlight, and any other program that requires DirectX 9 support in the video card will not work at all under current versions of VMware or Parallels. OpenGL support seems to be more complete under Parallels, which is probably why ClearView works, but it's still much slower under Parallels than when running natively (other OpenGL programs that is; I haven't tried ClearView).

I don't claim to know exactly WHY the performance is poor, but I believe it's because the virtual machine is not capable of virtualizing peripherals like a video card, so it actually has to emulate the video card, including hardware acceleration features, even if the physical video card in the host machine has hardware acceleration.

[ShakataGaNai]

More linux titles! Less dual booting to WinSuckP!

[nihil]

However unlikely it is (and I do agree it is unlikely) that the majority of win32 apps/games will be ported to Linux, many are, or will be. But nobody is going to want to do it unless people voice their preferences. I may not persuade Runtime to port their sim, I may not persuade skirts to port clearview (not that I'd want to from what I've seen of both the sim itself and his conduct), but I will voice my preferences in the hopes that somewhere down the line more recreational software will be ported to Linux and/or other open source operating systems.

I don't know why it's so important to some people that everyone else have the same opinion they do, but that kind of arrogance serves only to hinder computing rather than advance it.

As for virtual machines, it was mentioned earlier in the thread that hardware availability is no problem, making the use of a virtual machine un-necessary. By sending a simple email, I can have even more hardware show up on my doorstep, at no cost to me (company foots the bill), with windows pre-installed. It's not about money, it's not about hardware, It's about choice.

[archiebald]

I voted NO simply because I have no interest in Linux. I would rather have my teeth pulled with no anesthetic than piss around with patches and drivers. Done enough of that.

Oh, and by the way, I think that Runtime should finish Phoenix off before even thinking about porting it. (see my comments in the big Phoenix thread)

If you are interested in a sim for Linux, there is an AFPD version for it.

Forum Here
http://www.ipacs.de/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=13

[TasKiNG]

For all of you linux users out there I though I would point out that the stand alone version of Phoenix Server does run under linux using Wine.
I have had it running for a few days now under linux.

[nihil]

Any chance of you posting your wine config? I tried it under cedega with no luck.

[TasKiNG]

I'm not using any user cfg file i.e a .winerc file in my home directory.
I have not changed any wine settings, just installed it with apt-get then used it with the default settings.
Note: wine wont run The main phoenix program, only the new stand alone server.
cedega looks interesting will give it a try :)

[macr0t0r]

I WISH there were more Linux sims out there, for it usually is followed by a Mac version. Sadly, most Linux users aren't the type to pay for software. They are often willing to settle for lesser free software such as FMS or SSS. Pity...
Did you get the USB interface to work within Wine? I'm impressed! What adapter are you using?

- Jim

[TasKiNG]

macr0t0r.

I don't think it is due to Linux users not wanting to pay for software. Yes there is loads of free stuff for linux, some poor, some very proffesional. The reason software houses don't write programs for Linux is because they see the biggest market as windows and write specifically for that. If they wrote their programs to support OpenGL instead of DirectX and used portable code and libraries then they could easily create versions for Linux / Mac too and sell even more copies. Thats what ID software does with Quake / Doom etc and look how popular they are.

No I am not using the USB dongle in linux as I am running the stand alone server version on my server ( not the full program ) which does not require it.

So far there dosent seem much interest in phoenix server under linux but if people want it I will write a How-to to explain how my server is setup.

[bilboa]

Given that Linux only occupies about 2.5 % of the desktop market, I doubt ID Software's Linux port of Quake and Doom makes them much money, it just earns them some cool points with some people. I'd be curious to know if they even make as much on sales of the Linux versions of their product as they spend on creating and maintaining the Linux port. They're a big enough company to absorb an expense like that in exchange for the extra slashdot crowd cool points it earns them. A flight sim company is likely to have a much smaller budget to work with, so they probably won't support a Linux port until the Linux desktop market is big enough to actually be profitable.

[TasKiNG]

bilboa

have a look around the quake servers and you'll find the majority of the servers are running on linux. This is profit not cool slashdot points.

My point is that if applications are developed with opengl and portable code / libraries then porting to say linux or mac is easy.

The sad thing is that Max OSX and Linux are far better operating systems than windows but until developers start developing using portable code then the number of apps will stay limited for them.
Actually Linux is estimated to reach 6% of the desktop market by end of 2007 and this is a huge number of users. I think you will find that as there is little in the way of good comercial applications / Games for linux then anything that is released stands a good chance of selling well.

[pldaniels]

I may well be in the minority - but I have to say that I've purchased a lot more software for linux than I have ever for Windows.

Off the top of my head, QCAD, AC3D, MainActor, WordPerfect, Descent III, Heroes III, Koran, TurboPrint, VMWare, Eagle CAD (PCB) and quite a few other tools.

The point is, if the software exists and represents value, people will buy it. Linux is no longer the realm purely of broke kids/students, a lot of business people use it (myself included - note also that I've purchased games!)

[bilboa]

I agree with you TasKiNG. I've been using Linux exclusively at home since about '94, and recently switched over to an Intel MacBook Pro, while still using mostly Linux at work. So I'd love to see more Linux and Mac programs, and I totally agree with you about them being technically better OSes. Also pldaniels, I've also purchased plenty of Linux and Mac software.

I just don't agree with the people who say there's some kind of conspiracy or irrational bias that explains why most desktop software makers target Windows. As much as I'd like it to be otherwise, Windows occupies over 90% of the desktop market, so it makes the most financial sense for small desktop software makers to target Windows. I do agree with you though that there is money to be made selling Linux and Mac programs, it's just more of a niche market.

[danielw]

I use Linux only, i removed windows from my system years ago and will never go back!

for all you looking for a Linux heli sim, HELI-X was release on the 25 jan 2008, a few days ago!
a very impressive sim, built with java, will work on any java capable os!

visit http://www.heli-x.net/index_e.shtml

The developer is considering releasing it as open source, so im gonna try get as much attention to if from Linux users as i can, if you like the sim, spread the word!!!

[nihil]

Very cool, thanks for letting us know. I'm not a huge fan of Java, but I'm going to download it and try it out.

[nihil]

This is why I'm not overly fond of java (write once, run nowhere):

Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.Error: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
at org.xith3d.render.Canvas3DFactory.create(Canvas3DF actory.java:127)
at org.xith3d.render.Canvas3DFactory.create(Canvas3DF actory.java:149)
at org.xith3d.render.Canvas3DFactory.create(Canvas3DF actory.java:307)
at org.xith3d.render.Canvas3DPanel.<init>(Canvas3DPanel.java:286)
at org.xith3d.render.Canvas3DPanel.<init>(Canvas3DPanel.java:372)
at ch.ntb.HeliX.simulation.Simulation.initCanvas(Simu lation.java:188)
at ch.ntb.HeliX.simulation.Simulation.<init>(Simulation.java:123)
at ch.ntb.HeliX.application.Application.<init>(Application.java:146)
at ch.ntb.HeliX.application.Application$1.run(Applica tion.java:757)
at java.awt.event.InvocationEvent.dispatch(Invocation Event.java:209)
at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEvent(EventQueue.java: 597)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpOneEventForFilter s(EventDispatchThread.java:273)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForFilter(E ventDispatchThread.java:183)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForHierarch y(EventDispatchThread.java:173)
at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(EventDispa tchThread.java:168) at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(EventDispa tchThread.java:160) at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.run(EventDispatchThre ad.java:121)
Caused by: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInsta nce0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInsta nce(NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newI nstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:27)
at java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance(Construc tor.java:513)
at org.xith3d.render.Canvas3DFactory.create(Canvas3DF actory.java:123)
... 16 more
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: GLDrawableFactory.chooseGraphicsConfiguration() was not used when creating this Component
at com.sun.opengl.impl.x11.X11GLDrawableFactory.getGL Drawable(X11GLDrawableFactory.java:238)
at javax.media.opengl.GLCanvas.<init>(GLCanvas.java:142)
at org.xith3d.render.jsr231.CanvasPeerImplAWT.<init>(CanvasPeerImplAWT.java:118)
... 21 more


Maybe the next version.

[edfardos]

AeroFly Pro Deluxe has a native Linux version (free dload if you already have the windows version). The win32 version also runs just fine under Wine (9.0.50). It doesn't work at all under VMware. I've used a Dynam USB/joystick transmitter along with my logitech wingman -- i actually prefer the logitech (more buttons and switches for throttle hold, idle-up, etc).

It's a *very* good simulator imho. I've been doing tons of heli practice on it.

I gave up on Microsoft years ago. What's the point?


--edfardos

http://www.aerofly.com/ (home)
http://www.ipacs.de/forum/showthread.php?t=3952 (linux version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuQoezFIA_0 (video)

[danielw]

thanx edfardos, ill definately have to give aerofly a try!

nihil, what system you trying to run it on?