I, too, am staying with FS9. In fact, I am "expanding" it with GoFlight modules, TH2Go, another computer to drive the instruments via Wideview and such. I tried FSX, in fact I was very enthusiastic about it and have spent almost half a year with it. Tweaking, even buying add-ons, trying to make it run... In the end FS9 proved to be the sim to keep. Why? Fluid, high FPS, tons and tons of quality add-ons and so on... not to mention that I spent a LOT of money on FS9 addons and they do the job perfectly. I am happy as never before what with REX, ASA, GeProII, FE, PFE/RC4, FS FK, tons of AI and all those beautiful places and aircraft. Let's face it, FSX is as dead as FS9! MS has abandoned it so I find it a bit funny when I hear cries "But FS9 is dead!" Well, so is FSX... on the other hand, both sims are VERY much alive because of the community and what we should do is coexist in peace and share what we know. I will surely reinstall FSX at some point for VFR flying and soaring - and feel good about it. But for now, FS9 gives me everything I need and wish for. The fact that some developers now swear by FSX amuses me. As I said, FSX is just as dead a platform as is FS9, so.... :(Ok, off my soapbox. To answer one of the two original questions:1. You're not imagining things. ASA kindly provides for adequate fun, usually on approaches when your aircraft gets bounced up and/or down, ruining that perfect glide towards the treshold. I love it! :(2. I can't comment. I remember that wet rwys look fantastic in FSX and that is all. ...and add a third one:3. I find FS9 autogen much more "realistic" and convincing than FSX autogen. True, neither is perfect, but in FSX it has that nasty cartoony look inspite greater density. Just my personal observation.Regards,Jure

My heavily modded FS9 runs better on Win7 x64 than on XP SP3 x86. Don't know why, but it does. Got an 9800GT as well.Cheers, SLuggy

HelloSame here Win764 was slightly quicker than XP32 sp3 but had too many issues going on for me to like it.So I have moved to XP64 which has turned out to be the best of the three.Not as "pretty" to look at but all the advantages of 64bit without nonsense like UAC.

FSX + ASA + REX + UTX + GEX + detailed mesh + good computer + yoke and pedals + TrackIR + TripleHead = Heaven.As I am not a pilot, I can't talk about realism that much, but when it comes to immersion, FSX is king. I have FS9, too, but the fact alone that most stock planes are just modeled for a forward view from the cockpit makes it look extremely strange with TrackIR.And the difference between 1m phototexture and 4.7m phototexture, or the difference between 72m mesh and 5m mesh is incredible.My conclusion: If you fly the heavy iron at FL35 and not much more, FS9 wins because it can be run on a modest computer. If you fly the A2A Piper, the Duke or the Aerosoft Twin Otter low and slow over areas like ORBX Australia or Switzerland Pro, both FS9 and X-Plane look silly in comparison.

I'm more for simulation rather than eye candy, one of the main reasons I'm sticking with FS9 - it feels better and my frames do not drop below 40 with LVD767 (basically the only thing I fly) with a two monitor setup. With a one monitor setup, default aircraft I get the same performance in FSX but throw in another monitor and a complex aircraft and I get half the performance - it's just choppy and messy ! FS9 looks better IMO - less cartoony and with all the addons I have it looks 1000% better than default FSX.

... less cartoony and with all the addons I have it looks 1000% better than default FSX.

What looks cartoonish in FSX? Can't be the environment, since this is the most obvious step forward from FS9 to FSX. The planes? Hm. Don't think so.I have heard the claim a couple of times now, but knowing both simulators, I don't have the slightest idea what this refers to.Please enlighten me.

I create an argument with you because I don't agree with you...seems pretty simple! My argument with you was not about fsx vs. fs9-no where mentioned. As for the banning comment-get real

Well I'm another one staying with FS9... only time I run FSX is for problem solving and only if I really have to :( Personally I'm not concerned at all that MS have shelved FS. My wife is delighted too because now I don't have to purchase a new PC with every new FS release!Whatever happens in the future I think we're extremely fortunate that when MS pulled the plug they left us with two very good sims to choose from and enjoy.

The fact that some developers now swear by FSX amuses me. As I said, FSX is just as dead a platform as is FS9, so.... :(

Nothing amusing in there, I suppose. Devs just look at the figures. What sells and what doesn't.PMDG said 80% of their sales are FSX, 20% are FS9.This doesn't tell anything about the installed base of both simulators, just about sales of addons. But it tells a lot about what makes sense to develop, where to invest time into.And I beg to differ about FSX being dead. Currently, it is the most widespread flightsimming platform. FSX will be dead once the next gen flightsim has the advantages FSX now has over FS9 in terms of market success. Until then, it will be the milking cow for addon development.

Nothing amusing in there, I suppose. Devs just look at the figures. What sells and what doesn't.PMDG said 80% of their sales are FSX, 20% are FS9.This doesn't tell anything about the installed base of both simulators, just about sales of addons. But it tells a lot about what makes sense to develop, where to invest time into.And I beg to differ about FSX being dead. Currently, it is the most widespread flightsimming platform. FSX will be dead once the next gen flightsim has the advantages FSX now has over FS9 in terms of market success. Until then, it will be the milking cow for addon development.

HelloDead from the point that they are both abandoned by Microsoft, no further development (of this codebase :( ).Userbase is approx 50-50 , but most FS9 users have everything they need at this point to fully enjoy the sim.I have just about populated FS9 with every major european payware airport, why would I want to spend the money again on the same addons all over again, and it would be a Major investment.Fs9 will do for now until something better comes along, I own FSX and also have all the addons that you mentioned for it, I still prefer FS9Enjoy what you have both Sims have their merits, But I cant see me spending on FSX in the manner I did for FS9.

Dead from the point that they are both abandoned by Microsoft, no further development (of this codebase :( ).Userbase is approx 50-50 , but most FS9 users have everything they need at this point to fully enjoy the sim.

That's what I meant, thank you, Mad dog. I am sure that devs have their numbers but wherever I go, whatever I read on the forums, FS9 doesn't seem all that dead to me. I often read about users switching sims, FS9 to FSX and FSX to FS9, too. That surely doesn't seem dead to me. Both FS9 and FSX have a strong following as mentioned by others, so I believe it is perfectly ok if we, the FS9 users, express our wishes for more add-ons and pester the devs a little bit. Especially because we DO NOT say something like, hey, develop for FS9 only, who cares for FSX! :( An interesting example is the FSDreamteam. They develop a full blown version of an airport for FSX, then port it to FS9 without losing much sleep over it - and losing some detail in the process, but so what? Their work is excellent and way, way better than default airport(s). And we all benefit.

Fs9 will do for now until something better comes along, I own FSX and also have all the addons that you mentioned for it, I still prefer FS9Enjoy what you have both Sims have their merits, But I cant see me spending on FSX in the manner I did for FS9.

Amen to that. I tried FSX, I have the HW to run it but FS9 remains the sim of my choice. Very simple and I don't push my choice down anybody's throat, just expressing my views and opinions in a FS9 specific forum. :( Regards,Jure

Well I'm another one staying with FS9... only time I run FSX is for problem solving and only if I really have to :( Personally I'm not concerned at all that MS have shelved FS. My wife is delighted too because now I don't have to purchase a new PC with every new FS release!Whatever happens in the future I think we're extremely fortunate that when MS pulled the plug they left us with two very good sims to choose from and enjoy.

Dave,You and your team did a great job bringing Pro Flight back from the dead. Your next project should be to combine FSX and FS9. All the good qualities of both sims combined into one. All you need is a copy of both sims and a download from your company to get it to work without having to build a super computer. Dammit I just woke up, nice dream though. :(

Why not do what many of us do? Have both FS9 and FSX installed on our system.If you feel like going for an enjoyable flight, power up FSX with the RealAir Duke or the Carenado Seneca.For something more serious, power up FS9 with the Eaglesoft CitationX, PMDG 737NG, or Flight1 Piper Meridian.In either case, you get the best that flightsim has to offer.. and at a fraction of the price of a real world flight.No need to fret about which sim is better... at the price, fly them both! :(

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Absolutely agree! Personally, I use FS9 for IFR and FSX for VFR. With that in mind, I am completely covered! If you have the room, and your system can handle both formats...WHY THE HECK NOT HAVE BOTH OF THEM INSTALLED?!?!?!?!?!?!?? :) There would be no valid reason not to!

I tried FSX, I have the HW to run it but FS9 remains the sim of my choice. Very simple and I don't push my choice down anybody's throat, just expressing my views and opinions in a FS9 specific forum.

:(

Why not do what many of us do? Have both FS9 and FSX installed on our system.If you feel like going for an enjoyable flight, power up FSX with the RealAir Duke or the Carenado Seneca.For something more serious, power up FS9 with the Eaglesoft CitationX, PMDG 737NG, or Flight1 Piper Meridian.In either case, you get the best that flightsim has to offer.. and at a fraction of the price of a real world flight.No need to fret about which sim is better... at the price, fly them both! :(

I do have both FS9 and FSX installed and for now use them both. More than which is best I was asking in what way it's better and for which one to spend money on.For example I got for FS9 Misty Fjords and the free Glacier Bay. I'm thinking about Tongass fjords. Buying it for FS9 would give me a bigger total area than only Tongass Fjords for FSX. But the FSX Tongass fjord is improved over the FS9 version

Hi,1. Not your imagination.

Would you go so far as to say that with ASA FS9 and FSX are equally realistic with regard to air mass simulation and turbulence?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Absolutely agree! Personally, I use FS9 for IFR and FSX for VFR. With that in mind, I am completely covered! If you have the room, and your system can handle both formats...WHY THE HECK NOT HAVE BOTH OF THEM INSTALLED?!?!?!?!?!?!?? :) There would be no valid reason not to!

Sesquash- Why bother with FSX for VFR when you can do this with FS9 - on a 6 year old 'puter?? A lot easier on the bank account!Alex ReidDreamFleet Baron on final for CYKA Kamloops BC.