ok so this question has to be clarified as soon as possible between MS and RXP for things to evolved (or not).
I read they have other product(s) more “traditionnal” without these kind of licence issue but blocked from accessing the market. Is this licence issue with the product using garmin (that not exist for MSFS in fact) that is blocking these other products ?
Sorry for taking your time with all these questions. As customer and user of lot of these products (not only rxp) for a long times ago, i am just a little bit worried to not seeing them coming, it is a big change in our way of using the sim and i have to be a little bit reassured, or a least understand why. I have nothing against anyone, perhaps just have to accept the product has changed (and it is a good point for large number of points).
Sitting on the side, hoping to see RXP’s products in MSFS, I am amazed that there is such a hold up, over a disputed existence of a “License”.
I would suggest that RXP formally send a copy of this License to Microsoft legal, so that MS can “legally” determine that such a license exists, and then MSFS Management can be refereed to Microsoft Legal , and thing should be able to progress.
If this is truly a “legal” issue, get it sorted once and for all at a “Legal” level.
Perhaps Garmin do not auth to divulg this licence.
Anyways, Garmin unit based are one thing but i ask also for some news about perhaps new features for users or devs resulting from discussions between RXP and FS Devs Team (if any finally !)
I don’t understand what there is to be amazed about. Microsoft has a license with Garmin to use their product and likeness in the simulator. As such, Microsoft could not possibly officially distribute any software that runs counter to Garmin EULA or uses the product or likeness without permission. Doing so is both illegal and would unnecessarily put Microsoft’s own Garmin license at risk. Solving this mystery seems relatively straightforward, though; we haven’t heard any word on that front.
RXP asked for the following features (status in parenthesis):
Hi bandwidth, low latency IPC for external executable to sim communication (Not Planned)
Interposing and overwriting stock SimVars (Overwriting GPS simvars was already planned for the future. No other present plans)
Overriding the autopilot state management and simvar usage (Was already planned for the future and presently being tested on the upcoming G1000 NXi)
JS/WASM interop (Was already in discussion, not yet planned)
I let Jean-Luc know that when or if I had any news on those features being released, I would let him know.
Hope to see all the enhancement avalaible in the future (not too far) for all devs.
Concerning Garmin, as MS and RXP have licence (taht’s what both said and i have no reason to doubt), i think it is now to Garmin to decide if the “mix” of both licence is or not a problem.
Thx you for your reply and informations Matt, i appreciate you take the time to follow them to us
(now i back to lean how to create scenery cause i miss Lake Hood too much (and i don’t know why MS has removed it since patch #2 !)
I am a “simmer” not a Gamer… One of the things that is well “poop” about MSFS is how bad it is at running multiple simultaneous screens. When we “pop” out a window to take it onto another screen (so my GTN750 Hardware from RSG) the FPS drops and that is just what it is…
I have used RXP in FSX and in P3D. I use it to stay Proficient with my Home Sim for flying… The RXP by using the Trainer is delivering me the identical experience and interface. This is the GARMIN unit to me. Now if it runs in it’s own process and threads that means better performance. And in a MultiPC Sim setup I am able to offload resources which again is another big big bonus…
There are many other Avionics solutions out there that will want to do similar things and control the sim. While making sure that they process out side of it… TDS has done a Garmin Trainer in a similar method as RXP would do it… I have it… The warts are evident and bad… And no the PMS50 version of the 750 is not even close…
At my flying club we have a Redbird “Motion” Sim… The worst thing about that product (and its not cheap) is that the GNS is not actually a Garmin Trainer and so things don’t work like they do in the real plane… So yeah when you are prepping for your IPC it is a pain in the but when the buttons don’t work the same.
Reality XP has been doing this for years. There is a lot of people still on Lockheed P3D that don’t really qualify for the license… but they have no choice because the tools we want can’t be brought to MSFS without a little work. Maybe more understanding or “Nihito” time needs to be spent with regards to this portion of the flight simulation community…
And for those that bring up the Database thing … This does not matter… If you think it matters don’t buy the product… Thousands of us need the Trainer version not the “mocked up” version.
Thanks for you time Matt… see you in the discord
Oh and if you would like to have watch of how the trainer can work with MSFS now and see why it has issues then as a MSFS customer I would be willing to share my time to provide you with the information.
Not only for fidelity but RXP on P3D or XP11 has insignifiante impact on perf (even if i had 4 GTN on screen, 2 on VC and 2 on popup That’s a performance !. We cannot say the same for glass gauge in MSFS until now. Doing the a 1:1 will take more than 10-15% of a frame rendering time, it is not acceptable.
You’re publicly questioning the legal nature of RXP business, the legitimacy of our products and you are allegedly saying Microsoft is refusing our Market Place application because we’re in breach of a 3rd party software EULA. I find this outrageous, disrespectful and utterly unprofessional and this begs again the question who benefits the most from you lecturing me…
Let me set the record straight for the community:
I didn’t know Microsoft cared about RXP’s agreement with Garmin. I would assume they would have asked if this was the case, rather than completely cut me off with no word. If that is the reason of their silence, I would have expected them to ask about this issue, or at the very least tell me the reason for their cut off. This doesn’t show good faith otherwise.
Since Microsoft never asked RXP about any such licensing or EULA questions, I invite you therefore to prove to the community your claims and tell everyone why are you so certain that RXP is in breach of any Garmin agreement. Making such accusations without proof is a very serious thing I do not consider any lightly.
Notwithstanding you aren’t questioning any legal obligations of any other vendor portraying any other Aircraft or Avionics IP, whether they are approved or not on the market place, your repeated derogatory comments solely focusing on RXP and the fact you’re also divulging elements of our private correspondence to the public is questioning your integrity to me.
Until then, considering that you don’t know what my relation with Garmin is, I’m asking you to stop spreading any further libellous and slanderous comments otherwise you can expect a more formal letter from me in the coming days.
I have been trying to reach out for 18 months, not just for offering to our customers their favourite RXP products on their favourite simulator, but also for sharing with Microsoft and Asobo our unique expertise in this industry. Regardless of this misunderstanding which I’m sure we’ll solve promptly, I’m still more than willing to contribute and assist to the best of my ability to the success of the franchise. I’m open to discussing this, and more, with Microsoft and Asobo.
My understanding is that the TDS products would also suffer from the same EULA and licensing issue, and would not be allowed on the Marketplace without specific licensing from Garmin. I’ve spoken with the TDS dev, he seems like a really great and cordial individual as well, but that’s just the present legal limitation as far as I’ve been made aware of it. It’s truly not anything specific to RXP. Regardless, it’s trivially easy for us to clear all this up; I’ll give you a ring later and I’m sure we’ll have that part of it sorted in no time.
As I mentioned previously, I don’t have the full history of the communication here, but I’m just trying to be as transparent as possible because it seems the community wants to know. I assumed that things like requested features would not be particularly sensitive to disclose to the community, and wanted, again, to be fully transparent as to what was communicated, as it seems it is easy for things to be misunderstood. If I made a bad assumption there, I absolutely apologize 100%.
Hey folks! I encourage you to take this to a private message now, as it seems to be getting into the nitty gritty of legal conversation that would be best kept between only the parties involved. Closing this topic temporarily but will re-open next week. Thanks!
Been months since I’ve had any sim time but when I think of doing it I always do my checks to see if my favorite addons have made it to MSFS20 yet. I started my day researching on the RXP forum and then read a ton more on Avsim and followed a link here to which I wish I could upvote more than once. Hard to say what I wanted to since in the course of the days reading I must now respect the moderators on what is said, but although I read more today than in the last year combined, and all in trying to find out where the RXP product line is, I have one question.
Is being on the “Marketplace” really that important? Or do they also somehow block it from being used at all? Although MS or Asobo still haven’t made it so I can see my addons purchased outside of the marketplace, outside of the marketplace is where I do most of my purchases since I prefer more coin go to the devs of their products and like to get faster updates and prefer their own launchers.
Well today’s sim time has been used up in catching up on all this but overall I’m glad to see something is happening and hope to see my GTN750 available soon!!!
I believe nothing is impossible and it wouldn’t be correct to assume there would be, eventually, just one reason like the one you’re telling.
I thank you for your support. There has been I believe a lot of assumptions about a lot of things floating around, but hopefully we’re all gentlemen wanting nothing but the best success for the franchise, and I’m refusing to believing both Microsoft and Asobo aren’t considering that RXP, a renown vendor for 20 years in this industry, is an asset they could benefit from, even if the last 18 months are telling otherwise.