I can't believe that people are defending one program or another. They are both good, the authors must have our thanks for the effort and that's it. I tried FSInn and been testing SB3 (a lot of difference between testing and trying.) The program approaches are different:- FSInn uses P2P and smoothing if P2P is unavailable. SB3 uses smoothing.- FSInn as more an all in one approach. SB3 has a SDK that allows external programs and gauges to interact with the program;- SB3 has aircraft plugin method FSInn uses an automated process;- Both program give you a trouble free connection by using things like lobby connections;- FSInn has several small interfaces and a control panel that calls them. SB3 has a compact non obstructive interface;- FSinn uses a new IPC module developed by them; SB3 uses the well established FSUIPC;Besides this small list thare is a lot more but I believe that only these differences will allow the users to choose. What I know is that both Joel and Benjamin are persons that we must be thankful and help them if they want.Jos

I believe that what happens is this:FS2004 updates Multiplayer at program FPS. That means if you FS has 45 FPS them the multiplayer will be 45 Hz (in the sense velocity packets/second). What I understood from FSInn, the program samples these packet at the frequency choose by the user and send them. In fact if your FS has 5 FPS there is no sense in having more than 5 Hz since the base info will be 5 Hz. In the reception the same happens and that's why there are some indications about Computer specs in the FSInn dialog.Jos

Terms Hz, Frames per second, Packages per second, are the same and it's nothing wrong to use any of them. Seconds per package is the oposite (Seconds per package=1/Hz)It is no big deal to make the client selectable "framereate up to maximum 40Hz".The problem is, the complete system include currently Vatsim servers result in much lower framerate. As Martin Georg say "This currently is 5 seconds per data package.", yes it look like 0.2 Hz when I observe other airplanes. Consider Vatsim servers must handle 300 airplanes in many different matter, with distribution over world servers.There is no way to get faster than via Vatsim servers, unless maybe:If all clients send all data also direct to all other clients that are near distance airplanes. If so it need support data from Vatsim such as IP-numbers to other clients. Is this the ide with fast clients (?)However the internet it self could provide 5Hz, and up to 25Hz if user have good connection to same server.Lennart Vedin SAS202

> In fact if your FS has 5 FPSIt's possible to run FS with 5 FPS somehow, however I'm certain it's a few FS user have such low FPS. 15-20 FPS is more reasonable.Lennart Vedin SAS202

Guys, hi this is Benjamin from FSFDT.i must say this thread is quite annoying, you are trying to compare both FSInn and SB3 based on incorrect informations, on smoothing/refreshment and on CSL/AI Aircraft.FYI i was the one to introduce the Hz naming because i felt is was way more adapted to hit per second rather than FPS.Both FSInn and SB3 have smoothing and plane postion info per seconds (actual plane position). As far as i understood from SB3 (hope joel will correct me if i am wrong), SB3 send/recv plane postion info from 0.2Hz to 1Hz. SB3 goes 1Hz thru server and with planes under 1Nm.FSInn goes from 0.2Hz to 40Hz. This is user selectable and negiciable between plane users. 40Hz is suggested to make descent formation flying on high speed planes (above 250Kts), 1HZ is enought to fly side by side with a J3 or glider.Then there is smoothing. Both SB3 and FSInn are doing smoothing.SB3 goes up to 20Hz to display smoothing interpolation hit, and its user selectable to make it eye candy depending on your FS FPS (you dont need 20Hz on a 10FPS max old computer).FSInn doesnt have a smoothing interpolation frequency tunable, its automatic and goes from 0.5Hz up to 20Hz depending on the distance, speed of the other planes.If you are curious of performance and smooth looking. I will say that to look at aircraft moving on ground, or landing or talking off, a 0.2Hz with a 1HZ to 20Hz smoothing is enought to make it nice looking and immersive.Why go higher so with position updates from 1Hz up to 40Hz then ? i would say VFR flights and formation flying would could become a new hobby on networks rather than plain old IFR.SB3 and FSInn are different on a another point P2P and High rate Server passthru postion frame. SB3 choosed to use server passthru frames, this is more convinient due to problem with routers, but it increase server bandwidth use, and it increase latency, the FSD server need to be modified to support it.On our side , FSFDT, with FSInn we are fully independant from networks, and P2P makes the update frame fully independant from networks and servers, we support UPnp to passhtru recent routers on any Windows 32bits OS, the bandwidth can be bigger because we are point to point (not thru server) and the latency is lower than goign thru a server, but you need a correct router and firewall setup.Even if you are using SB3 or FSInn and you see a plane around and even if the pilot isnt using the same software as you, you will see him smooth enought to see him smooth landing or rolling. About CSL/VIP and AI Aircraft. Currently FSInn doesnt support CSL/VIP, but could in futur. Why didnt we used it ? Because CSL/VIP models are incorrectly configured for FS, you will randomly see a CSL/VIP displayed aircraft on the ground, it depends on the real model the other pilot is using. VIP/CSL is missing some infos required for FS that makes a plane sit on ground when you use it, FSInn (as FS) nneds that to make ANY plane in ANY case "glued" on ground with gears down. If in the futur CSL/VIP, we will find a way to support VIP3 also, but till now we didnt have access to it (restricted to SB3 Alpha testers).FSInn uses any plane you have installed (except CSL/VIP), FSInn recognise thoses planes as ICAO aircraft and airline code, and use it. Algorythm used to select a plane to display has a huge list of criterias, but even if you dont like the model and repaitn display you can change it live, without having to disconnect. AS FSInn is using any planes installed on your FS, we suggested FSInn users to download AI Aircrafts, because there is many models in it, because there is many repaints in it, and because usually they are very nice looking and still frame rate friendly. I have 3000 models/repaints installed on my FS, FSInn is able to select the best suitable plane to display a friend or a traffic around. Conclusion : FSInn is far from restrictive on the models and paints you want to use or see (except CSL/VIP).In conclusion, now please, stop writing about nosense, wait for SB3 and FSInn available if you want to compare, and in any case choose the software you like the most because fortunatly for VATSIM users you will have the opportunity to choose between 2 new clients on MSFS, thats a huge step forward !http://www.mcdu.com/screens/FSInnB4.jpg

There is one thing you can accurately compare though.FSInn is public beta, vs a closed beta for SB3. Benjamin, is there any advantages you see in the public beta? I'm not taking one side over the other, just curious over the difference in approaches.BTW the interface looks incredible!

I could be wrong on this one but FSInn is open beta on there servers only, from the way this reads."As you may have seen, FSFDT and VATSIM agreed to work to make FSInn available in a near futur on VATSIM. This introduce a new step by step processing to make sure FSInn is safe and fully compatible with VATSIM features. We are now working in conjonction with VATSIM staff to complete all this steps as quick as possible."

Dave. I don't know where the information comes from to suggest that FSINN is incomplete. FSINN is complete and works very well. It works at this time with VATSIM. We are not waiting for FSINN, we are waiting for VATSIM. Looking at the track history and close feedback that comes from FSFDT, they are very swift to do whatever has been asked of them for VATSIM. At this time they are only asked to wait. Wait for VATSIM, not to implement anything that hasn't been implemented, and not to fix anything that is broken or doesn't work. I VATSIM might be waiting for SB3. They are also doing other things with the server. But waiting for FSINN isn't one of the factors of the wait. If we were waiting for Benjamin to do something with FSINN, he would tell us what he was adding and he would give us a forecast on completion. -- L. James----------------L. D. [email protected]/~ljames

That came right off the FSInn website, however it is dated Sept/04

Benjamin. Thanks for the feedback on the program and development. Try not to be too annoyed with this thread. I

I've pretty much given up on flying on VATSIM until a new client is out. I looked at swithing to IVAO, but there were basically no ATC on for Canada any time I looked, so I'm just flying mostly offline right now. I look forward to any client being available.I have since reinstalled Ultimate Traffic for my offline flying, but I like the idea if being able to have FSInn use it's models for VATSIM. I have many Canadian specific airlines installed so it should work quite well for me, plus any I'm missing I can easily add to it, so in that way this approach is more flexible than a CSL.

L. James, I believe you are correct in saying that it's a matter of waiting for Vatsim and not FSInn. The reason, as I understand it, is that Vatsim is implementing a new server protocol and all will have to wait before anything is to be certified for Vatsim. This new code will then have to be implemented into FSInn and SB3. So as you see it's not possible to have FSinn flying on Vatsim for the general public yet....this is just the way I understand it and is in no way the official reason.

Mikkel. I'm aware of the rewriting of the server protocol. I'm hoping the powers that be would consider allowing us to use FSINN in lieu of SB2.3 at this time. I'm glad they haven't just closed the server during the development. However, at this time, FSINN would actually function as a better interim than SB2.3. -- L. James---------------L. D. [email protected]/~ljames

I agree that it would be a better alternative than SB, I've actually started flying on IVAO because of it. It's so much easier getting online with ivap, plus there are more pilots flying in Europe on IVAO than Vatsim.