Lynux
- Thread starter Regal
- Start date
marcushh777
Well-known member
The simple answer is, no.
The extended answer (which has been hashed out on this forum ad nauseum) is a little more complicated.
Firstly, I am assuming that when you say 'Lynux' you are actually referring to the GNU unix-like operating system which currently uses the Linux kernel for system resource management. You might also mean other unix-like systems (Mac OSX, AIX, UNIX, FreeBSD, BSD, etc). RealFlight is a Windows application which means that it depends upon the Win32 API. It is also a DirectX graphical application. DirectX is a proprietary graphical API which is protected by patent and DRM; as well, DirectX has (for several technical reasons) problems rendering correctly in a DLL environment on GNU (with the Linux kernel) in say, for instance, WINE.
That said, RealFlight will run fine in a virtualization environment (running on licensed Windows 10, in a 'container' on Linux). In that sense, RealFlight may 'operate' or 'run' on other operating systems; however, RealFlight cannot run native on other operating systems besides the now unsupported Win7, or supported systems like Win8 and Win10... both NT operating systems by Microsoft (C) requiring DirectX 9c.
Having said that, much of the Win32 API (in fact most) has been replicated in the WINE project on the GNU operating system, with the Linux kernel. While I was a software engineer with IBM (left in 2002) I helped make the Lotus Notes system run in WINE; which was a phenomenal achievement, even if I do say so myself. Many many applications compiled for Windows will run in WINE; however, only rarely and with very limited success has DirectX been able to run in WINE... which is why technically RealFlight will not 'run' in GNU, with the Linux kernel. RealFlight must have the full DirectX 9c component(s) in order to render correctly. Some of this problem technically (some legally) has to do with the fact that the graphical processor cards (also proprietary) designed to work properly with DirectX, have not been made available completely to Linux kernel developers, nor have they to-date been 'black box' reverse engineered. Consequently, you might be able to appreciate why this specific graphical application product has not been ported to other platforms.
RealFlight has 'evolved' for almost a quarter century around DirectX in the Windows environment. It would be a major undertaking to port the product (should anyone be inclined to do so) and would take several years and would have huge production costs; this simply is not warranted. For one, RealFlight is a niche application type (minimal very specialized highly focused user-base) and as it really happens, most of that user-base are not computer Geeks and nerds (not Linux hobbyists) but are mostly RC hobbyists who put up with computers in order to have a simulator for their RC interests. There simply isn't enough demand for an application port, to warrant the time and expense of the required software engineering.
Nobody hates this worse than I do; believe me. I am a total and complete GNU|Linux Geek Nerd from the ground up; I was one of the very first IBMers to bring Linux into the work-place in a mission critical application. In my professional and personal computer science life (for more than forty years) I have focused on unix-like systems and over the past thirty years I have purchased only One Windows computer -- the Dell G5 15 5500 that I'm dedicating to running my RealFlight 9 simulator. And why... because I live near the arctic circle in a frozen land called Minnesota, and I want to fly my RC planes all year when the weather outside is not conducive to recreational model flight. RealFlight 9 is the only application that I have not been able to find an acceptable non Windows replacement for -- and if I could I certainly would! ... in a New York minute. But, I'm in the minority.
marcus
Last edited:
marcushh777
Well-known member
I agree totally; and will add, that most of those are not computer Geeks; my own father for instance... he loves to fly and build models (and he is also an actual pilot) but computers and programming leave him kind'a cold.
It better! Because sooner of later (and probably sooner) DX9c is going to die and be unsupported. My guess is that very few modern graphical applications (mostly games titles) use the earlier version(s) of DX. Well, the other thing I'm noticing about most RC users is that their computers are generally not state-of-the-art systems either. Consequently a new product line which might require high-end hardware and the lastest cards, might not gain full acceptance soon (1) because RealFlight9 runs great on existing hardware systems, and (2) because that 55+ crowd from the flying field a likely to resist change especially if the change is likely to cost them big bucks. Just saying.
marcus
A
Old story, already done and done. Just dive into the early RF X threads......required much more horsepower than people were willing to spend money on....(and that it wasn't near the full feature level of it's predecessors). Few sales due to the hardware upgrade costs, little new feature development therefore, and it was allowed to die a lingering death.
Old story, already done and done. Just dive into the early RF X threads......required much more horsepower than people were willing to spend money on....(and that it wasn't near the full feature level of it's predecessors). Few sales due to the hardware upgrade costs, little new feature development therefore, and it was allowed to die a lingering death.