If X-Plane crashes and you send us an automatic crash report, please consider including a valid email address.
- Without an email address, we cannot contact you for more information about your system, add-ons, what you were doing, etc.
- If you include an email address and then email us later, we can use the email address as a key to pull up your crashes from within our database.
We do not share the email addresses (or any other info from the crash reports) with outside companies and we do not use them for marketing!
Good idea, I’d imagine error tracking is very important. Perhaps you should make this clearer on the crash report page, people are always worried about giving out email addresses, but if you make it clear that they’re never passed on I’m sure you’ll get more.
Hi
The linux version has the Automatic crash reporter?
yes, all three OSes do.
Hm, is it running on an another thread? I’m using X-Plane on linux. I’ve created an entry to GDM login screen to start x-plane as a window manager – so no other programs will run in the background. If my xplane crashes, it simply falls back to GDM, no crash report window appear. I’ve tried run x-palne (latest beta) from terminal too, but no luck: there was no crash report.
I usually provide my email address when X-Plane crashes in twilight conditions (which is the case 80% of the time). I think I already sent more than 10 of such crash reports 😀
I hope that this kind of crash is fixed some day and that the crash reports are helping with this.
The crash reports are helping a LOT. Now if you get a crash, that is no good to you, but I can tell you that we’ve brought the level of crash reports we get WAY down (and the big item that hasn’t budged is memory exhaustion, which we will cover with 64-bit).
Mario, I get the same crashes from memory like you
Very excited about 10.20
Offtopic but since the first release of XP10 I’ve probably spend around 250-300 effective hours on improving OSM roads in Europe. Really hoping we soon can see an official update taken to XP!
Just please, Ben, tell us all far in advance when you are planning to do a full world import of changes so that we can cram just some more roads in.
Thanks for all the info posted on your blog!
– Airport lights are toned down a lot. I enjoyed seeing far away airports at night very much, now they are a lo harder to make out, especially the blue lights and the single blinking light seems almost gone. Is this intentionally?
Running non-HDR on a late 2009 iMac.
Robert – I’m sorry to edit the post, but please _do not_ post bug reports on this blog. We have a hard policy about this. Use the bug reporter!!!!!!
Blue taxiway lights – there is some debate within the company (ahem) about how bright they should be, but I can say this: their toning down relative to 10.05r1 is intentional and in real life they are _not_ particularly visible from far away/high up.
In v9, you could see an airport from afar as a sea of blue in a black sky. Beautiful, but nothing like reality. In reality, I have been on night flights with Austin several times in and around Columbia and:
1. At no time have I ever identified the taxiway lights before being on final. In the sea of lights you will just never see blue. They are too dim and they have a limit to their vertical directionality; as your angle to the field is more up than over, they disappear, and as you get far away they don’t sustain.
2. Generally speaking, the city is always brighter than the airfield – I have seen this in countless real-world flights, both on airliners and in GA planes. If you don’t know where the field is and aren’t used to looking for rotating beacons, an airfield in a city is not easy to find.
Here is a thought:
Just add a “realism” airfield light check box on rendering, and let the simmer decide the intensity he/she prefers. Beginners will appreciate it.
Being true to reality is one thing, while visual management is another and should be customized and decided by the simmer.
Just a thought.
I think I disagree with that idea…we allow users to turn off visual settings in a few conditions:
– Where they affect performance. (E.g. you don’t have to have max houses if your machine can’t take it.)
– Where there is a UI issue. (E.g. for some sim applications, warning messages on the main screen are okay UI, for others, like a physical sim they violate training goals – no hints for the pilot!)
– Where the feature is totally annoying – (This is why you can turn off the aurora borealis. The right thing would be to make the effect better and less frequent and leave it on all of the time; the check box is a cheap trick to avoid having to invest more time in an effect that just isn’t high priority. Deleting it from the sim would also be a reasonable thing to do.)
I don’t think more-vs-less-like-real-life fits on that scale…if we can be more realistic for the same hw cost, we should always do that. From my view there are already too many check boxes for setting renderings and it makes it hard and tedious to really get a nice result.
You could argue that over-bright runways is a training aid – similar to the in-cockpit warnings (where we print “your carburetor has ice” instead of making you deduce why your plane is losing power) but that’s sort of an odd side effect of what was essentially a bug.
several months ago EDFM tower controller demonstrated me the effect of adjusting the runway and taxiway light intensity. With full power, the whole runway really looked like a christmas tree from tower view. He said, level 2 (from 7) is enough for most situations, pilots prefer a more dimmed lighting!
but to be honest, i can see my home base PAPI much clearer than now in 10.10, it has been better before…
I wasn’t even thinking of the missing callouts as a bug, you might aswell have removed it for other reasons. Does an F-22 even have callouts? I enjoy the improved flight model, but having them makes landings easier.
I was kind of expecting your reply concerning the airport lights, thank you for going into detail. I was viewing the issue from a purely aesthetical standpoint. The dusk/twilight visuals over LA are exceptional not only or flight simulation but for any genre, and I tend to look very closley at those changes you make, also the more reddish tone of the lights. I am not complaining at all since .10r1 has been very smooth for 6hrs and I am just amazed to see this thing getting more and more sophisticated.
As you move closer to 64bit, will the RAM amount x-plane will utilize be as much as you can put in the computer? i.e even 16- 32GB
It will depend on your settings, but yes, it may be possible with some settings for x-plane to use as much RAM as you have. You may find that you can’t max out RAM without add-ons, and you may find that by the time x-plane is using 32 GB of RAM you’ve lost fps.
Alright, time will tell, looking forward to it. Worse case I can crank things up a little more and not get memory crash. Likely and better case is crank items up even more so with the 16GB I have and possibly adding more.
Thanks
— nuked by Ben —
Please: do not re-post your bug reports to the blog. We did receive and read your bug report!
I disagree with the deleted post on this blog, but you own it so you can do whatever you want. I thought my post was relevant to the discussion. It was a feature enhancement request–not a bug per se.
You did right to file it on the bug report form. I gotta discourage re-posting bug reports to the blog. I am getting killed with users sending copies of bugs to my email, the blog, etc.
Hi Ben, could you put a link to the Bug Report on the side of the blog? As it is we kinda have to dig through some older posts to find the link. Thanks
Check out the second link given at the upper right corner of this page under “Useful Links.”
That was added in response to his comment. 😉
That was quick! 🙂
a little bit off topic. in a post a while ago, you asked for platform independend technology for a new ui. ever considered to use html5 ? apart from low-level os access to apis for joystick settings, it provides everything required for great interfaces to select aircrafts, airports, maps, integrate checklists etc. E.g. it would also allow to change settings via smart devices…
Ben: let me first start off by saying what a great job you guys do. But I do have a question. You asked for e-mail addresses in the bug reports. At this time I have probably sent over 20 or 30 reports for the same issue I have even begged for reply, I know you guys are busy but could you possibly send me an e-mail or at least an update to your blog regarding the HDR crash issue. I’m not one of these people who posts all the time, I try not to bother you guys since I know how busy you are. But as a former I.T. Professional it just bugs me not knowing the reason why something doesn’t work. If you would like I would send you a copy of the aircraft were currently working on. We posted screenshots on X-Plane’s Facebook forum under JazAero and would love to hear your thoughts when you have some time.
Thanks for listening
Jim
Hi Jim,
Oh boy. The automatic crash reporter is _not_ like the bug reporter. Someone reads every bug report that is submitted. Some get thrown out (E.g. if you write “f u you big fat pigs” Chris is just going to hit delete”) and some go to tech support, but there’s a human on the end.
Not so with the crash reporter. We look at the crash reporter _statistically_ – we have a script that buckets crashes and we then look at the most common ones first. Since we’re struggling to get bugs fixed in the RC, I am behind at looking at crashes. But also, your crashes are all deep in the NV driver – and some have a completely trashed stack, which makes them not pop out in the ‘common crashes’ search.
I’ll email you off-blog later, but it never occurred to me (and perhaps not to Chris) that users would think that every crash report is run by engineering or tech support.
(In particular, if we find a SET of crashes with the same signature and we look at one, find the bug and fix it, we often don’t even look at the other ones…we assume that the crash is one bug, put the fix out, then re-measure.)
cheers
ben
That makes sense, I also assumed they were read just like bug reports. I still think you guys should incorporate bug reporting within the sim, at least for beta’s. That way a user could maybe enter things like email addresses once then any subsequent reports would automatically have them added, along with any automatically picked data.
This would be great because as soon as someone sees the bug in question they could make the report there and then and you would have the very last log files. You could even incorporate facility for a screen dump for visual bugs.
Hang on, i’m just making more work for you guys aren’t I?
cheers nick