I don't think FS9 has been forgotten, but FSX is the hype right now..The last review I submitted to CP was for FSX only and the other was for both, I am somewhat jaded when it comes to my overall opinion of FSX so I tend to base my review on what sim it is best on. I agree with the masses about FSX, though every day that goes by I find myself finding something else that I like about it more; but I always end up going back to FS9...You know, on the other side of the fence; the other day I recieved an email regarding one of my reviews here and it stated that I should leave my contempt for FSX at home when reviewing products.. Wrong, if the box says it supports FSX than it better support FSX.. I can totally understand an add-on that is a mere port from FS9, but when it states FSX, it had best do so.

Hmmm, no offense to anyone but what I've noticed (at least for the relatively recent times) is the unmitigated "bashing" going on in the forums, it seems every post is doing it. Far too many people either don't realize, or don't care, that what works for me won't work for everyone. For each tale of frustration there can very well be another of glowing praise. If those "bashers" would only stop and insert those magic words "for ME" or "on MY system" life would be a lot nicer. Avsim used to be a place for information, camaraderie and socialization. It's become a place of contentiousness and biting commentary on, of all things, other people. Please remember that these words are not aimed at some one person; for confirmation of my point just go out to check on today's posters. Back on topic:I subscribe to Computer Pilot; I've never been less than satisfied and for some of the articles ecstatic might be more appropriate. That said, I fully realize that what works for me will not and does not satisfy others. I too, along with many other people will not be moving on to FSX for quite some time as MY computer just won't "cut it" and I haven't presently got the scratch to buy a new one. So for now, those articles CP has been (and prolly will be doing) on FSX and the products related to it will be stuffing up the magazine. Funny, although they relate to a product I don't/can't use, there is "meat" in them for me also.:D

dekoven,I understand what you're saying but when I read an inside and review publication like PC Pilot and I'm paraphrasing here, from the JAN/FEB 2007 issue of PC Pilot, that "FSX supports dual core processors and SLI" and various other "far from the truth" sentences. Did they just NOT KNOW what the heck was going on? It's laughable. Even my casual simmer friends know what the heck is going on with FSX from reading various forums. And still....PC Pilot gives FSX 5 out of 5 stars after those completely bogus statements. There's only one or two sentences within the entire 10 page article about performance issues. :-hmmm When I get home from NG drill I can look at and post the exact wording.

>dekoven,>I understand what you're saying but when I read an inside and>review publication like PC Pilot and I'm paraphrasing here,>from the JAN/FEB 2007 issue of PC Pilot, that "FSX supports>dual core processors and SLI" and various other "far from the>truth" sentences. Did they just NOT KNOW what the heck was>going on? It's laughable. Even my casual simmer friends know>what the heck is going on with FSX from reading various>forums. >> Snipped out.It's worth remembering that the lead time on most magazines of this type is going on 4 to 6 months. Thus, "pseudonomous" knowledge gained and written on may be sadly out of date by the time the reader actually gets the mag. In the case of M$Soft it happens all the time. They, Msoft, will make large noises about "features" and then when all is said and done those "features" disappear without a trace, leaving all those writer pundits hanging.Go figger!:D

I generally agree that bashing for the sake of bashing is not productive or useful. However, we are consumers, and we are paying for flight sim software, magazines etc. And therefore, I think, when appropriate, it

Good points. Oh, and I stand corrected. It was the late 2006 issues that stated what I mentioned above. Not this month's article on FSX in PC Pilot.