FSX content taxonomy
Posted:
Wed May 07, 2008 4:56 pmby PhilTaylor
after several rounds of discussions on various forums over how to label FSX content, I developed a FSX content taxonomy to more fully describe the problem.
this description can be found here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2 ... onomy.aspxI hope people find it useful.
Re: FSX content taxonomy
Posted:
Wed May 07, 2008 7:42 pmby BFMF
I like your idea.... :)
An old outdated FS9 aircraft shouldn't be labeled 'FSX Certified', especially if it's a payware aircraft. That's false advertisement...
#$%&*@! Carenado.... >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Re: FSX content taxonomy
Posted:
Thu May 08, 2008 12:21 pmby Microsoft Corporation
I've only bought one payware AC for FSX which is the Airbus Collection and I regret it. That $35 would have been better spent on a FSX SDK AC.
Re: FSX content taxonomy
Posted:
Thu May 08, 2008 5:14 pmby macca22au
There is really some excellent payware for FSX, so I'm sorry that your experience has been bad. The wilco airbus 1 & 2 are better, but there are many many others large and small that are demanding and fun.
Re: FSX content taxonomy
Posted:
Thu May 08, 2008 8:01 pmby BFMF
I don't doubt that there are good payware addons for FSX/SP2, but a lot of FSX addons don't say if they're specifically for FSX/SP2, or somewhat compatible with FSX.
That's why i'm hesitent. Saying it's 'FSX Certified' is vague, and doesn't mean a thing anymore