Tinmouse II and the future

[PLazarus 0]

Hola Bob,I have great respect for your work over the years. Thanks for the PSS bus airfiles I still use.. plus of course the TinmouseII.I read in the FAQ about your thoughts on FSX and your possibly not developing for it at all.I urge you please to reconsider. My take on the situation is this... Aces are working on a performance patch. As it stands at the moment with my mid range system I get 20 fps locked, so with the patch that will improve. Once that patch is out and stable we will get the DX10 enhancement. I dont know if that will improve frames but I am certain it will improve visuals without reducing frames. In a few months ( 6?? ) DX10 hardware will be more widely available and cheaper.Add to these various tweeks and addons ( such as reduced sized clouds etc that will slowly creep in as either payware or freeware -as they did with FS9 )then the future for the sim is looking brighter than many feel at the moment.I understand that many feel FSX is unusable at the moment... but these are the key words.. at the moment. Over time, with the patches and enhancements is is going to be great.My hope is that you develop with an eye to the future and that the Timmouse II might one day be flying in my FSX skies.Thanks for listening to my ramblings.Cheers,Paul ( just up the coast a bit from you in Lima! )

[Bob Scott 7,719]

Hola Paul; Thanks for the nice compliments. As far as the TinMouse II and FSX, never say never, but I will wait for some real developments to occur with FSX before I invest a lot of time moving the panel in that direction. Right now, FSX is still pretty sterile...very few enhanced airports, and a jet doesn't spend enough time down low to get a lot of benefit from the graphical improvements. Besides, with a full suite of FS9 add-ons like ActiveSky, Ground Environment, and high-quality airports like those from Cloud9, FlyTampa etc, it's hard to view FSX as much of a graphical improvement, anyway.Anyway, time will tell.SaludosBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

[PLazarus 0]

OK Bob, I fully understand now.I will keep my fingers crossed that FSX gets the improvements needed for developers like yourself to feel it warrents the efforts.I agree it's pretty sterile at the moment, but I am sure we are going to get the addons sooner or later. I downloaded and tried the Cloud9 Bergen the other day... I thought that was pretty impressive considering the zero frame rate hit on my system.Thanks,Paul

[STUART_H 12]

Hi,Do I take it from the above that the 737-200 ADV panel will not work in FSX at all? Last night I thought I would try it, since it only seems to have one main gauge file. Although FSX asked, as is normal, whether I wanted to load the gauge as trusted, it did not complain about FS98 gauges,so I was expecting the gauges to display at least. However, the 2D bipmap displayed OK but none of the guages existed 'at all'. I just wondered if maybe I did something wrong, or is it to be expected that no guages will load?I am not too worried about the internal view bitmaps, but the panel was great in FS9.Cheers,Stuart

[Bob Scott 7,719]

No, unfortunately the TinMouse II panel will definitely not work in FSX...tested and proven to be the case. The FSSound module which is used for the internal panel sounds is incompatible with FSX, and there are many other changes required to make the panel gauges run properly in FSX. Until I can get an FSX configuration that doesn't make me want to run screaming back to FS9, I'm not working that way...>I am not too worried about the internal view bitmaps, but the>panel was great in FS9.Now don't be speaking about the TinMouse in past tense. Or FS9 for that matter either! ;-)RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

[STUART_H 12]

Bob,Many thanks for your clarification.I shall not bother then attempting to see what I may have done wrong!I certainly wont speak of the TinMouse as past tense, and I still have FS9 on my other harddrive, so all is certainly not lost.I just feel that when ACES release the planned patch for FSX, which hopefully will solve a number of key issues, that I shall prefer to use FSX rather than FS9 and perhaps have to sacrifice a number of great add-ons until the next generation appear - e.g. LD767 to name just another one.I shall keep tabs on all the news pages and forums just in case.

[Bob Scott 7,719]

What I find interesting, is that the most-heralded potential improvements in FSX are things that are, for the most part, not critical to a good flight in an airliner...thermals, or detailed scenery from FL330 for example.If FSX is fixed, I see myself continuing to fly the good heavy metal like the 'Mouse, Level-D, and the (formerly) Lago MadDog in FS9, with my low/slow flyin' (helicopters, GA, vintage) moving over to FSX. No way I write off my FS9 birds just to move over to FSX, even if it works OK.I hope that MS can/does solve the FSX woes, because I don't want to see development of FS die, as it will if ACES can't serve something up that we want to keep buying.CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

[STUART_H 12]

Would be nice if we can all have a crystal ball! Hopefully we shall not have too long to wait to see exactly what ACES upgrade / fix in FSX.I am hoping that they may have taken heed of the forums and resolved things like the polygon issues with existing 3rd party sceneries which will hopefully mean that whilst the FS9 sceneries may not take advantage of all the new FSX functionality, they may still at least work. Alot of developers are slowly upgrading their titles to work in FSX, and I would be quite happy to pay a nominal upgrade fee to have something like LD767, or MD80 available. Also, I believe they will have identified other areas to improve the FPS issues too. We shall see !Whilst the scenery is vastly improved over I believe even FS9+GE-Pro (which I myself had installed), it does not make much difference from 30,000 feet, even with photo-scenery. However, when flying heavy metal at that altitude, I do not take alot of notice of the scenery down below, although the sky and environment becomes important. But when taking off or on approach, having a more realistic environment (autogen trees and buildings typical of the region) becomes an important factor. Having spent an hour or so fying from A to B, it is really nice to get an essance of what B is like.Like you though, I have not uninstalled FS9 yet, but still find my flying time taken up with regional flights in FSX, since the new VC and even 2D gauges etc. are extremely well done. And a smooth 15-20 fps in FSX feels equivalent to 30+ fps in FS9, so overall the flight dynamics are better.Here hoping for some great news from ACES in the next couple of weeks.Cheers,Stuart

[Guest sandro becker]

I can tell one thing. FSX will be like FS2000. A pain in the ####.Like Bob told: I prefer my FS( with ground enviroment etc. I have 30 frames stable with 732.See u.