They are legitimate concerns b/c they pertain to you directly.What is MS supposed to do? Provide a sim for every user that fits his/her machine specifically?You have raised concerns that were the same for FS02, how about designing a fix for them and helping out instead of continually telling us what you think is wrong.Like so many other simmers that have nothing better to do with their time, you'll just "be here watching as well to see how all this will shake out."KJhttp://fsgateway.com/frank/fs9paibeta.jpg

Hi MC, "MS will have to rewrite the code"The result will not means as a sucess product either, remember the complete new engine from flyII, fs2000 and cfs3, not great compare to their previous engine."not worry about backwards compatibility."I agree on this one, you will still have tons of post and worrie about this in this forum and others.There is no really good solution on any product for all users preference, there is always bad and good things, this is PC Software.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

Disappearing taxiways.... Taxiing at smaller airports causes aircraft to bump along like you are on grass... All clouds disappearing when transitioning from one reporting station to another... Have to tear up your old manual to get the rebate... all fixed! Good enough for me. I'm sticking with 2K4.

>So basically in the end, what you get for your $50+ for FS2004 is >FS2002 with Service Pack 1 and a new weather system.oops, you forgot a few:Along with that new weather system.Taxiway signs at all airportsBetter ATCBetter road and river flattening codingBumpmapped waterMore dynamic sceneryMore ststic modelsBetter modelled airportsBetter FM on a/cClickable VCsTwice the density of AutogenNewly added autogen models, hydro, road signs, etcUpdated ground textureshttp://members.rogers.com/jkanold/Nepal.jpgFrom a flight I took earlier today. http://members.rogers.com/jkanold/jimlogo.gif

If Microsoft would hire me I would go. I'm a certified private pilot as well as a C++ and Visual Basic programmer with a BA in Computer Science from the Universiy of Minnesota. My current job is a Windows2000/NT network systems analyst for the City of Minneapolis. I'll see if their taking applications...

Hi Geofa. If you don't mind me asking, what is your CPU, RAM and VC? Also, and I know this is a lot to ask, but can you tell me your settings for the following:Scenery Tab----------------------------Special effects detail:Terrain mesh complexity:Terrain texture size:Terrain detail:Water effects:Dawn/dusk texture blending (yes/no):Extended terrain textures (yes/no):Scenery complexity:Autogen density:Add-on dynamic scenery (yes/no and level):Ground scenery casts shadows (yes/no):Sun glare (yes/no):Lens flare (yes/no):Aircraft Tab----------------------------Virtual cockpit gauge quality:Reflections (yes/no):Aircraft cast shadows (yes/no):Landing lights (yes/no):Weather Tab----------------------------Sight distance:Cloud draw distance:3-D cloud percentage:Simple or Detailed clouds:Cloud coverage density:Hardware Tab----------------------------Target frame rate:Available display resolutions:Render to texture (yes/no):Transform and lighting (yes/no):Anti-aliasing (yes/no):Filtering:MIP mapping quality:Hardware-rendered lights:Global max texture size:Traffic----------------------------Air traffic density (%):I'm trying to gauge my system based on those of you who are having excellent results. Also, do you see these same results while flying around some where like New York?thxJohn

After reading with you had to say, I still stick with my original assessment. FS2002 with SP1. :)>>So basically in the end, what you get for your $50+ for>FS2004 is >FS2002 with Service Pack 1 and a new weather>system.>>oops, you forgot a few:>>Along with that new weather system.>Taxiway signs at all airports>Better ATC>Better road and river flattening coding>Bumpmapped water>More dynamic scenery>More ststic models>Better modelled airports>Better FM on a/c>Clickable VCs>Twice the density of Autogen>Newly added autogen models, hydro, road signs, etc>Updated ground textures>

Wow-don't know if I can do all that!But:System:athlon 2100+, geforce ti4200, 512k ram.Display:Terrain mesh 83Terrain texture size-highTeraain land only-halfWater effects-highDawn/dusk-checkedextended terrain-checkedspecial effects-highscenery complexity-extremely highautogen-extremely denseadd on dynamic-nothingscenery shadows-nothingsun glare-lens flare-checkedAircraft-high then everything high and checkedweather-sight distance 60 miles,cloud distance 40 miles, cloud % 100detailed clouds maximumHaredware-frame rate-101280x1024-32 bitrender to texture checkedt@l checkedno antialiastrilinear filteringmip map 4hardware lighting 8global tex size-maxI get normally 18-20 fps in the air with real weather download-sometimes at highly rendered airport down to 8-10 while taxiing on the groundhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

e.g. Something for nothing (or in this case a lot for nothing).... :-)http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

I still fail to see how things like:New ATC featuresAll new realistic GPSNew high detail airportsTaxiway signsNew precipitation effectsDirectX9 hardware supportconsitute a "patch" to 2002. A patch fixes bugs, an *upgrade* adds features. The FS2002 GPS wasn't bugged. The lack of taxiway signs wasn't a bug, it was the way it was designed. Did FS2002 need a patch? Most certainly in my opinion to fix things like the taxi-friction and glidslope capture. Those are the kid of things I expect in patches, not major upgrades and enhancments to the sim.Ryan

Ryan,It's no use arguing with some folks. I'll just enjoy the sim and let them steam.

Hmmmmmmmmm go back to Oct 2001, "Fs2002 sucks", its worse than 2000...yadda yadda yadda.The textures are blurry, I should be able to see 1000 miles when Im at FL330, and I just see blurries. Shall I go on?What do you want from piece of software that cost $60? I will say this again, as I said almost 2 yrs ago. Its a game, that tries to simulate flight, and scenery as close to reality as possible. You get what you pay for and $60 will not get you a 4 axis simulator, with stunning renditions of the country side.All this babble will go on for months until someone starts another tips site. People will figure out whats works best for them and their computers. Remember kiddies, not all PCs are alike, and neither are video cards. You cannot blame Microsoft for poor video driver performance that many who run the ATI cards are experiencing. BLAME ATI!As for patch, Microsoft will stick by their guns like they did with FS2002. Many screamed for patch, but Microsoft didnt release because IT DIDNT NEED IT! And I am sure that FS2004 doesnt need one either.

This is so entertaining, keep it up I'm enjoying this. Best Regards,Randy

1. Get a fast processor2. Get a fast video board3. Enjoy!!!I love it and I dont have framerate problems.I think they have done a great job and it is an improvementto fs2002BobG

Hi Geofa,I have always enjoyed your comments and thanks for your inputs.I have a P4 3.0G, an Intel D865 833FSB mobo with 1G of ddr ram and a ATI 9800 128M video card with the Catalyst 3.6 driver. In FS2002 I am getting close to 25 - 28 fps on the ground and around 30fps in the air with sliders mostly to the right and no clouds, but high detail scenery. This is with the PMDG 737-600.I installed FS2004 today and with the same setup but with sliders mid range and no clouds and the stock 737, I am getting in the range of 7 - 11 fps. If I move the sliders to the left I get up to 14fps. I don't know if this is a video problem or not. I am getting flickering when I go to menu items and it takes a long time for a menu to appear which I am sure is a video driver issue. I did go back to the 3.1 driver which helped the flickering a little but didn't help the long pause to bring up a menu or the fps. The textures were bad but improved when I went back to the 3.1 driver. This is also a video problem.With my system, I expected better than 7 - 15fps especially with the way it is working with FS2002. I plan on re-installing my G4 Ti4600 card to see if that makes a difference and then trying the settings you have.If you have any suggestions they would be appreciated.Thanks in advance,Tom