Hi Thomas, 
you are absolutely correct, XPUIPC is not from Pete. It was my bad english. What I meant was "Pete's FSUIPC" instead of "FSUIPC from Pete" - sorry. 
  
However, I cannot agree that XPUIPC has nothing to do with Pete's FSUIPC. 
As I'm using it since to 2010 intensivly, honestly, I know what I'm talking about. Beside offering a lot of original FSUIPCs offsets in the correct (FSUIPC) format, it's easily extensible by a simple cfg-file. So a lot of existing applications for the FS / P3D world are also usable 1:1. 
  
Btw, AFAIK, XPUIPC is continued by Cyris in the meantime. 
  
But, it is absolutely not my intend to fight for or against XPUIPC with X-Plane nor for or against FSUIPC with MS or LM products. 
  
The XPWideClient may be "only"  32bit. However, It's only neccessary, or better one way, to connect from a different PC in the network to the master. It has absolutly nothing to do with the accessibility to the 64bit plugin XPUIPC within a 64bit X-Plane. 
You may know that the plugins, XPUIPC and FSUIPC, offer their interface based on network protocols - indpendent of 32 or 64 bit. It might be a question of ipv4 and ipv6. 
  
My application is runnig on a X-Plane "master". (Yes there is a 2nd PC slaved to it to show the left and right view on a 2nd and 3rd projector in the cockpit (over all ~170°)). 
So far the X-Planes are running all in 64bit (all 3) and all on a 64bit OS. Only the Master has the XPUIPC plugin. And yes I'm accessing it - on the same "Master PC" - with my application. And this is has still to be compiled as 32 bit due to this excellent "FSUIPC client dll". 
The application (will) contain the dispays: PFD left, PFD right, ND left, ND right, E/WD, SD with a dozen of Pages, MFD left, MFD right (the last 2 also with a couple of pages) and last but not least the "com"-displays. 65% are ready. In addition there is a NAV database I would like to keep in memory. Over all memory consuming. (yes -  16GB on bord are enough). 
That is (shortly) the story behind it. And that is the reason for asking for a 64bit version. 
  
Paul, your wrote "If all of that ever happens then I can easily release a 64 bit version of the DLL. But at the moment, as Thomas says, there is no point" 
So, hopefully, I could expain that there is a point :) - at least a smalle one. 
  
Best regards 
Jürgen