Have a look at http://www.x-plane.com/Very nice redesign. Congrats to Laminar Research!edit: I just read on the new website they have sold over 750,000 copies of Xplane! I guess a lot of those are the IPhone version, but still that's impressive.

website looks better....but"Switching from Microsoft Flight Simulator?Moving over, moving up."LMAO

Hello everyone.The site looks better, but it's just as superficial as before. The guy needs to grow up and take himself more seriously. He comes across like a young buck, making statements that make him look silly. Just my personal opinion, of course. TV

website looks better....but"Switching from Microsoft Flight Simulator?Moving over, moving up."LMAO

There is a lot of marketing hype............but then there always has..For instance. Here is part of the marketing/hype text:"Tens of thousands of users have already switched from "the other flight sim" to X-Plane. Most of the time, they do so because they've found out about how much better X-Plane's flight model is inherently than the model that everyone else offers."Personally, I must be looking in all the wrong places, because I've yet to find an X-Plane model that tops some of the better 3rd party models for MSFS, in regards to flight fidelity. And in general, X-Plane default models are worse than what comes standard with FS9/FSX. In fact, a few FS9/FSX default models aren't too bad at all (** see below). So how is a simmer who doesn't fly real planes going to know; what's good and what isn't? As a general rule, since I do fly real planes (higher performace GA) rather regularly; I'm still never much thrilled after an X-Plane sim session. And I've been using X-Plane demo's as well as two bought-en versions for at least 15 years!I've seen X-Plane testimonials that state some common themes; such as "X-Plane is more difficult to fly, therefor it must be more realistic". Of course this isn't a real fact. A real plane doesn't jerk around the sky as if it's infinite turbulence, or swing wildly on the runway due to very over exaggerated cross winds.There are lot's of other problems too, such as pitching or ballooning in the wrong direction with flap deployment. If "blade element theory" was so superior to MSFS's "look up tables", then you'd think that all these and many more problems would be taken care of automatically. But they are NOT! In reality, a decent X-Plane model needs tweaking, potions , spells, and wizardry just like the better models for MSFS. In other words, the author of an airplane better have years of experience, and having piloting experience, or pilot testers sure doesn't hurt either. You can't just take it for granted that throwing dimensions and horsepower into X-Plane's "plane maker" is going to spit out something believable, because usually it doesn't. Yet, from all the hype, you'd think it would.Compound this with monthly update/revisions that can literally destroy the flight calculations of previous models, then you've got a real problem in discovering what's realistic or not. Yet, the hype on the X-Plane website is so good, that many will believe that X-Plane is much closer to a real life experience, and that MSFS is just more of an entertaining "game". In reality, that is also far from the truth!I have both sims, because I see that X-Plane isn't all that bad. Unfortunately, it isn't all that good either. It requires too much tweaking and reading of others experiences and fixes to get decent results. And with the constant revisions, you have to keep ahead of all those too. I'm just not interested in all that, let alone populating all my own airports, cities, etc. Some enjoy that. I don't.So no........................ from experience I don't find X-Planes flight model to be inherently better. Sometimes I find that it pales in comparison to the "other sim"..... which is obviously FS9/FSX.edit: Postscript. X-Plane certainly has it's fine points. I just personally get irrated with the "hype", and it probably shows... :) ** Note: the FS9 and possibly the FSX "Cub" model seems to suffer from computer anxiety that leads to ground loops. Sometimes it works fine, and sometimes is unflyable" Seems to depend on CPU moods...L.Adamson

Wow look... we can't go on your forums and talk about how good X-plane is... so please don't come here and do the same... and for the record, the flight model is called Stability Derivative.. not "look up table" that's entirely a different thing, so please learn a bit about your flight model and comeback and you'll see X-plane uses a variation of that for the AI/multiplayer.

Switching from Microsoft Flight Simulator?Moving over, moving up.

:( That IS funny!They are trying way too hard to catch up.I personally installed X-Plane 8 and fired it up once and closed it after about an hr of messing around with it and never went back to it again. I regretted every single Byte of the hard disk taken up by it. This was just MY experience, it may be different for others. If a product is of quality, it will speak for itself and it doesn't need no bull crap like the quote above on X-plane's website.

Why all the X-Plane hate? X-Plane may be far from perfect but I found it to be a superior product compared to FSX. X-plane works like a top. I have had zero harware or software problems with it. I know a lot of people in the FlightSim community don't want to hear this, but FSX DOES NOT WORK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I will NOT spend half a second trying to figure out a problem the DESIGNER should have solved prior to the products release.There I've said it and probably angered three quarters of the simmers out there. For future reference, I will NOT retract my statement :(: P.S. I have FS9 and that one works great

Why all the X-Plane hate? X-Plane may be far from perfect but I found it to be a superior product compared to FSX. FSX was a dud right out of the box, there is no way one can argue that to the contrary. X-plane works like a top. I have had no hardware or software issues with it.P.S. The World Scenery kicks royal butt!!! That I can't deny :(

I don't think there is any xplane hate.I and many others have an open mind-I gave it an intensive 2 month exclusive try in the last few months as I have in the past. I have deserted fs for pro pilot, fly, and xplane in the past. I have always been only interested in the best sim at the time-no loyalty here-proven..When it is the best I'll go for it-convince me....other than a few things I really like I can't really give it the go right now-including world scenery.It does have some interesting aspects compared to the past-but still too many things way behind imho-and fsx has been working for me since it came out-xplane seems to have a nasty nvidia driver problem-but I dont' judge it on the constant crashes from that-it just has lots of catching up to do.

I am with you on that Geofa. I feel that if I am paying money and spending time, I would like to get something worthy back.The reason I spent only an hr playing around with it was because coming from a FSX "background," I simply couldn't believe what I was seeing. I thought I had done something wrong. The graphics, the overall feel, the UI, etc was just so :( When I first fired up FSX about a year ago, even though it wasn't perfect, but I could see the potential and the "first glance" was just much much better than my experience with X-Plane. Again, this was just my experience/taste, it may be different for others.Nonetheless, we all love to fly. Either be it FSX, X-plane, FS9, FS2002 or whatever it may be, we all have a common purpose and that is to F L Y :( Best regards,F.K.

No Nvidia driver problems here, all versions of XP 9 and the betas have worked without problems.Both XP and FSX/FS9 have their good/bad points.If only there was some "uber-sim" that combined the good points of both in one package. Maybe that will be the new sim that Aerosoft are thinking of developing? :(http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=27229

Both XP and FSX/FS9 have their good/bad points.If only there was some "uber-sim" that combined the good points of both in one package. Maybe that will be the new sim that Aerosoft are thinking of developing? :(http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=27229

My rant........ :( I've seen some X-Planers complaining that Aerosoft isn't using some type of "on the fly" blade element theory equations like X-Plane. I've seen it written that X-Plane is constantly calculating flight dynamics as the control stick is moved, while MSFS is simply imitating preconceived movements from a large look up table. Therefor, many X-Pane enthusiasts get the notion that "Austins blade element theory" is ALWAYS far superior. You'll often see insinuations that X-Plane is a TRUE flight simulator, while MSFS is for those who enjoy SCENERY viewing, even to the point of being ARCADE. So once again, do you want to fly realistically..................or look at scenery for entertainment? At least that's what they say....But........................ if you're up in the sky flying real planes, with more experience than a casual flight with a friend, or demo from some school; you'll see that it isn't as it might appear. You'll soon notice that X-plane isn't as powerful as some think, and that much of the performance and sensations are incorrect. You'll find that "look up tables" are much more than just following a written script. You'll find that MSFS can re-create the feel of inertia, dampening, and power to weight, often better than X-Plane. You'll find that MSFS is very capable of operating like a real aircraft, as well as providing the "feel". Yes, it's true that both simulators have certain advantages. That's why I have both. However, the advantage of X-Plane isn't with it's flight dynamics. In certain areas, yes, but overall...................usually no. Either way, the best flight realism involves programming from those with a lot of experience. Both programs need specialized tweaking from those who know the work arounds. You just can't throw dimensions in "plane maker" and expect realistic results. And why am I "ranting" here? Mostly.... because I cannot at another particular forum.L.Adamson

X-plane = FAA certified... what part of that don't you guys understand... it has been validated by the FAA!!!! MSFS couldn't even fill out the application form.. :)

X-plane = FAA certified... what part of that don't you guys understand... it has been validated by the FAA!!!! MSFS couldn't even fill out the application form.. :)

Doesn't mean as much, as what it appears to. It was FAA certified in conjuction with a full size simulator. The flight dynamics didn't even have to be that good. In fact, they're not that great on many other FAA certified simulators. They just have to be with in certain specs of the real aircraft. More than not, these types of sims are used for IFR work. Not replicating the real aircraft.The US Navy used a version of MSFS for it's own pilots. Adjustments for made to fit their criteria, but that's what 3rd party's do for MSFS everyday.Other FAA approved simulation setups also use MSFS as the software. But it's the specific hardware that makes it logable.BTW--- I built an airplane, and it's FAA certified (experimental catagory)........ and it fly's just like a real airplane. But that doesn't mean X-Plane has too... :( L.Adamson

Yeah but you do realize the Stability Derivative(implemented via lookup table) approach is only useful for the CG of the aircraft/rocket :) The moment you introduce wings you have to use a different approach all together.. and you're absolutely right the FAA approved portion only comes into effect once you have the appropriate hardware and it's pretty much limited to the exisiting EFIS app for 10 hours of IFR work out of a total of 50 hours. And ultimately the simulator is generating an environment to drive existing hardware. Now with more development X-plane should be able to implement the full bus used in all civil/military aircraft.. then Boeing doesn't have to rely on anyone else to develop a full flight sim... just build the cockpit connect it to X-plane and you've saved a few million dollars :)ESP/FSX11 could have become FAA approved , but that only works by replacing the flight dynamics with you guessed it Blade Element Theory and other F.E.M. methods.Just remember no matter how good the flight sim... Boeing will ultimately finalize their designs in the standard wind tunnel... simulators could never replace wind and smoke :) Well at least not until we enter the quantum age.

X-plane = FAA certified... what part of that don't you guys understand... it has been validated by the FAA!!!! MSFS couldn't even fill out the application form.. :)

Fs is also certified under its different name-esp. I have a video here in the video forum of me flying a full motion simulator using it at Oshkosh this summer. The only difference from fsx was the hardware.As I am sure you well know-getting certified has less to do with the software and more to do with having a whole package of hardware and software and going thru the faa certification process.