sobek

It's been released into Open Beta.

Because the update hasn't been released yet.

We'll have to let McD know that their symbology is not up to our standards.

And what does it do in those games? Some fancy graphical effects at most, and don't be mistaken, those won't work with AMD cards.

Makes sense to integrate weapons that need INS data after the INS is done. You wouldn't be able to do much with smart weapons right now because the Viper doesn't even have a SPI yet. You can only drop on a waypoint or steer the waypoint with the TGP. All the things you say are "boring" are actually prerequisites for smart weapons.

The product itself is in Early Access, but it is available over Beta and Stable Branches.

There's no point. If you use PhysX for anything more consequential than visual effects, you lock all AMD GPU users out of your product. That's why PhysX never really took off.

Vulkan doesn't change anything WRT Physx.

Lemoine, not lemon.

EEGS doesn't make your list?

Works on my machine. :music_whistling:

Obviously some people don't need Pu to produce a lot of hot air.

They were on holidays, what did you expect? :huh:

A Windows server is comparatively painful to host and there's less and less people proficient with it. Of course you can do everything yourself, but not everybody has enough bandwidth at home or can be bothered to do that.

Where did i say it was the cost of the OS?

They still use Microsofts C++ libraries. If they replace those with boost, Qt, etc. then it could work, but at this point, no.

It's much easier and cheaper to get a Linux server hosted than a Windows machine.

I've spent 6 years moderating this forum, translating manuals for DCS to German, providing voiceovers for official modules and doing closed beta testing so where do you get off telling my what I have to do for this community? Jeez.

Abstract in the sense of you don't have to worry about it when you write a program on application level. Not abstract in the sense of complicated. I've already explained the reason for this in a previous post of mine. It has nothing to do with DCS "not supporting hyperthreading" and everything with how DCS spreads its computational load over its threads. If the devs manage to spread the bulk of the CPU load evenly over many threads, you will most likely see a minor improvement from hyperthreading. You would see the same effect if it was possible to remove or add physical cores to your system. As long as you don't force additional threads into the CPU core that the main DCS thread runs in, removing physical OR logical cores has the same impact, namely none whatsoever. But please, do tell me more about how to write multithreaded applications. /sarcasm

It's still built with Microsofts C++ libraries, so no. There's equivalents for those under Linux, but using those necessitates a big refactoring task.

At this point i'll take everything that isn't just a mapping of green to grayscale.

Applications don't "do Hyperthreading". On application level, you don't care about that at all. It's all abstract to you. If Hyperthreading is enabled, the operating system sees a higher number of cores available, everything else is handled by the much lower level drivers/firmware.

The CPU doesn't "have" a thread, the number simply states how many it can process quasi simultaneously.

It will be different shaders and textures. What more could you want?