It

Strangely enough, there's nothing on FSX in there that I saw. That article's pretty old.-jk

Yes I did mention it was pre-Vista updates and pre-driver maturity that has made Vista 64 an excellent gaming OS, but as the description in the review says -

Yes, Vista run so well everyone's using it, right? ANd Microsoft is keeping it, right? That's how well it works?

Look through real hardware sites and see who

Yes I did mention it was pre-Vista updates and pre-driver maturity that has made Vista 64 an excellent gaming OS, but as the description in the review says -

I don't really have any proof, but in my experience, xp has performed better than vista with regards to popular games like Battlefield 2, Warcraft 3, FS9/X - that's just what I've noticed. Heck, vista idling for me steals a little over a gig of RAM. With 4GB's its not a huge deal but that's my story.

Neither do I. I drop money I can afford on hardware that I know how to setup properly for my application. Than just use Xplane. Why run FSX? Xplane runs a lot better on today's hardware. You want your 60 fps you'll get it w/Xplane. And you won't have to spend big bucks to do it. Why do you even bother with FSX if you're just going to give up on making it work to your liking? It's not about "looking" at FSX. It's about "flying" FSX. Life is so much better in a smooth, fluid environment with clear, detailed graphics. When this sim is set up properly it not only looks better, it flys better...meaning the airplanes perform as the sim intended them to.

I

I

Experiences with Vista? Never used it, never will. But I don't need to pile 1000lbs. in the trunk of my car to know it will slow it down. The majority of Vista feedback is negative and it's never changed even with the service packs. Mircosoft understands it and is canning it for W7. And FSX isn't directX10 either so there's nothing to be gained there.

It looks like this has turned out to be another,

Look through real hardware sites and see who

OK. No more quotes. I'll go back to my "rock" as you like to call it. There I will find enlightened folks who know better than to listen to a blithering idiot like you. You enjoy your motherboard raid and your bloatware. Wonder why your sim runs like crap? Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to be rude. I should have said "mediocre".You take excellent parts like the rampage formula/extreme, Q9650, etc...and run them on 74Gb raptors on motherboard raid? :( And you don't know how to use O&O right, that's for sure.You're obviously an expert who has far more simulator related insight and understanding than me. And you bring a great deal of variety to this this forum. Yes we need games like crysis talked about here on an AIRPLANE SIMULATION FORUM.Don't you get enough of crysis discussion with your other 14 year-old friends on myspace?I'm done here. -jk

:lol:

Windows 7 is not Windows Vista. This isn't about Windows 7. And good for you, you actually found some folks who run Vista. Too bad they can't convince the rest.

Who would be the

Yes, Vista run so well everyone's using it, right? ANd Microsoft is keeping it, right? That's how well it works?

You use these aspects to point out how poor Vista is, yet these points, in a way, also describe XP64. lol

By the way racing sims hold more interest for me than Crysis, although I have a copy of that also but I

GTR2, GTR: Evolution, and RFactor. Good times.

You

You

I need to check out iRacing. I heard it's an interesting sim. You pay for modules you want to use, correct?

You get four default tracks and three cars with the subscription. Once you see the other tracks and cars that have become available you