Has anyone heard from Microsoft lately???

[Guest Jimbofly]

Uh... there must be something wrong with your version of FS2004!The DirectX9 API is completely mature, and FAR more advanced than the DirectX8 API. You should get yourself informed about DirectX9s feature set.I've installed FS2002 after playing FS2004 for awhile, and it's almost like going from FS2002 to FS2000!I'm sorry, mate, but unless you have a faulty version of FS2004 or your vision is deteriorating, FS2004 is much more visually appealing than FS2002, and if we cast a poll, I think you'll find that 99% of users of FS2004 would agree with me.Sure, the water has some issues, and the sky may not be perfect, but when I look out my window here in Canberra whilst playing FS9 it certainly looks more like what I see than FS2002!!The ground textures actually resemble more of what you see in aerial photos in the new version of fs, as well. I could go on and on, and while I realise that FS2004 isn't perfect, I also acknowledge that it's a big improvement over the previous version.James

[Guest Douglas K]

>Very nicely put. And all for fifty bucks, too. Amazing.< I assume you're referring to the sarcastic intent of my previous statement, if that's the case then I'm glad you appreciated it.And you absolutely are missing something Mark, it's called product support, and it's been non-existent from the MSFS team. Rubbing elbows with "friendly and helpful" MS people who are armed with "superwhizzy laptops" at a social gathering attended by only a few MSFS enthusiasts really has no bearing on the issue of a complete lack of product support from these so-called friendly and helpful people does it? So let's put smoke blowing by well equipped corporate types at parties aside. The real issue is and has been the arrogant and indifferent way these people conduct themselves toward the customer.That was the subject of the forum topic back in October, and it still amazes me that anyone would say no to better customer support, or in this case to ANY support at all. When I mentioned fanatical customers in my previous reply this is exactly what I had in mind! Persons who are unreasonably enthusiastic about a product with a lot of room for improvement, and who seem to love the uncommunicative manufacturer of that product. And these same people seem willing to waive any consumer rights they might have regarding it. Did you also say no to an automobile warranty and service support from the manufacturer of that car you drive?But I'm glad that you're happy with what you have now, and that the software that you "can't knock" works for you. It works for me too, but it has a lot more problems than the previous version. I guess I need one of those HAL 9000 laptops the Microsoft team is equipped with. And I'm sure that nobody ever tires of hearing about how this product only cost "fifty bucks", that is a sure fire argument stopper! Brilliant and very original.>So boo yah, as Ron Stoppable would say.:)Best regards

[Guest keattchr]

With a post like that your the last person to trust.I love 2004. I drifted away from the hobby but 2204 has got me right back in there. The WX enviroment is much improved over 2003. The immersion factor is much improved.Why moan about it - stay with 2002 and be happy, after all, nobody forced you to buy it.I love it.Ray Keattch.

[Guest Hacksaw]

I love a lively discussion. But we should guard against gettin' nasty with each other.Joe

[Guest TimD]

I have spoken to the MS design team on some routine matters lately. I have not gotten the impression that they are "bailing out". On the contrary, they are indeed planning a next version of the sim. They will certainly continue to do so as long as it sells.As far as the SDKs go; no, they are not promising any dates, but this is par for the course. Many of the FS 2000 SDKs came out after they had released FS 2002. They have never been timely with this sort of thing.http://www.fsd-international.com/team/TD_forum_sig.gif

[Dark Moment 0]

<<>>I feel so humble ...<<>> Oh heck, I must have had a life, and missed all that. Dang.<<< Er ... OK. But it costs fifty dollars. I'm sure most of us can understand the economics of why a Boeing simulator costs more than an MS sim off the shelf in CompUSA.Anyway, I'm going away to fly my sim. Say anything around here, and people start throwing stones, it seems. That's OK ... I never question the word of experts in their own field.So not the drama, Douglas.Keep up all that good stuff north of the border, though, Elrond old chap. I usually enjoy your posts!Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/newlogo.jpg

[tf51d 284]

Did you also say no to an automobile warranty and service support from the manufacturer of that car you drive?I really don't understand your rational here! A car warranty is to fix problems that come up in a time period. Not to add enhancements to the vehicle. (Unless during a safety recall) When was the last time they enhanced your engine or radio etc... under warranty? This is precisely what you are expecting MS to do. While it would be nice (and they probably will at some point, based on past experience!) if MS produces a SDK(s) for FS2004 they are under no obligation to do so. I think everyone just expects it , since they have done so in previous versions. Now patches on the other hand I do expect if a major defect is found in the design of the product. I know of 2 right now which I hope gets fixed. The Timezone problem as MS didn't take into account DST for AI Traffic. Then again it only manifests itself with the real life schedules that 3rd party Traffic programs like Ultimate Traffic uses. Since FS default traffic is fictional this wouldn't matter, so MS may not actually consider this a bug. The other is how the AI aircraft groups up on landing forcing many unrealistic go arounds. It would be great if MS also releases SDKs but that would be icing on the cake It's not something we should be demanding of them.

[Guest hoohah]

I've heard from a pretty reliable source that FS9 was rushed for release before Oshkosk this year, instead of (the more reasonable) November release. So I would rationalize that we won't be seeing any SDk's or "feature packs" until spring of '04.But what the hell do I know...

[Guest cwra6]

Well, when the team lead from ms spoke at the AVSIM conference in Tahoe a while back, he said that the SDKs are not really part of the job spec, and that they tend to get written on personal time like at lunch, weekends etc. They don't have to publish SDKs - but do I think because they do like to see what folks do with thier "canvas" as it were. The team is filled with aviation enthusiasts for whom I get the sense this is far more than a job. It's easy to forget that the "enthusiast" segment for the game (i.e. add-on buyers, developers, AVSIM regulars) comprise a fairly small segment of the market. How many AVSIM members are there? Between 7,000 and 10,000 if I remember. A proverbial drop in the bucket for a title like fs. Have a good saturday. I'm going back to flying now. Colin

[Dillon 2,197]

Thanks Tim and Chris Willis for your feedback (well everyone for that matter). I was just wondering has anyone been in contact with Redmond and what is the state of Flight Simulator with Microsoft's brass. A good point was made stating that MS released FS2k4 in July versus November. If I remember correctly most SDK's were released in the Spring months of the following year. I just know without any SDK's it makes development hard for developers and in turn we all suffer. I remember contacting you Tim about when you guys were going to make you aircraft's VC's fully interactive (Commander, Seneca, etc.) and you told me not until the SDK's were released. At least that was a better answer than PSS's concerning updates for their A319/320/321 and Dash8 series. They don't want to even waist the time upgrading those packages and I know the lack of SDK information might be playing a part in their decision. Look at how long it's taking Lago to upgrade Emma Field because their waiting on a certain

[Guest Elrond]

Hi Mark,My first response to you wasn't meant to be negative or derogatory, even though I now realize thats how it does sound. All I was trying to point out was: most people are satisfied/happy with FS9, but they tend to almost completely forget the large group of people who are so frustrated in the background (those who provide a vast amount of the enjoyment that most actually get out of FS in the long run).Advocacy is what the post was trying to be about. People/Developers are frustrated - not what I'd hope others would support. Indeed, I'd hope everyone would get much more involved in actively supporting and advocating for the developers: its free to do so and a small price to pay for what is returned.Take care,Elrond

[tf51d 284]

Well, when the team lead from ms spoke at the AVSIM conference in Tahoe a while back, he said that the SDKs are not really part of the job spec, and that they tend to get written on personal time like at lunch, weekends etc. They don't have to publish SDKs - but do I think because they do like to see what folks do with thier "canvas" as it were. The team is filled with aviation enthusiasts for whom I get the sense this is far more than a job. Exactly! This is why the past SDK's always had the disclaimer "Not supported by Microsoft!!"

[Guest Elrond]

"the SDKs are not really part of the job spec" - "They don't have to publish SDKs"Which, to me, shows the absolute biggest problem with supporting Flight Simulator (and non-developers who don't argue more *for* developers). With that kind of policy and attitude, its a wonder any developer does work with FS anymore (outside those who are trying to make/supplement a living from it). Truly a bizarre policy and reality in this day and age of game development.I really wonder why many developers don't just move on to other sims/genre's where SDKs and support is near the #1 priority (most of the best games these days). Well, some are waking up, so I guess thats rhetorical.Take care,Elrond

[Guest Outer Marker]

In fact there are hardly any SDK's that are supported by Microsoft. However as an MCSE, I know that if you call Microsoft, they will always answer questions related to SDK's such as MS Office, MDAC, LDAP, Exchange, SQL, and many others.I maintain that they are not releasing SDK's yet, and are remaining silent becuase they are working on setting things right.There was no SDK for DirectX 9.0 - it was replaced within 2 weeks with DirectX 9.0b - for security reason. As you can see. Microsoft will always try to save face, and I hope that they will try to save face in the gaming industry too. Too many inconsistencies in their FS9 release.

[Guest Elrond]

"I think everyone just expects it"Developers expect it because its the standard in game development, by far, not an FS only policy. Its what enables the vast aftermarket addons (of high quality) that most here so enjoy.Whats unreasonable is to wait so long to help make FS more successful: specially when its an absolute standard for other games/communities that FS lacks so badly in.Take care,Elrond