Developers aren't looking for evidence that FS9 is still a viable market, many have decided to narrow their scope to a single platform regardless. So arguing back and forth and posting poll results that have been unanimous across multiple user sites are irrelevant to them. Like most management, once they are convinced of an idea there is no proving otherwise. Let's just enjoy the many outstanding add-ons we have, and move on with a more productive use of time and energy.

Your missing the point, FSX addon market is booming and it is not that there is no FS9 market, its that it is so small in relation for thier project that they will make little on it. Its not that no one uses FS9 anymore, Its just none of the FS9 users want to buy anything from the developers. FSX people are the only people buying things at the moment. Once the FSX Payware and Freeware markets become as saturated as the FS9 market then they will start seeing thier Return on Investment drop just like it did on the FS9 market.

At that point in the future it remains to be seen whether devs will continue for either version.Businesses often close out when markets weaken to a point as to no longer be viable. Example: Furniture Outlet Stores. :(

FSX people are the only people buying things at the moment

lol!

At that point in the future it remains to be seen whether devs will continue for either version.Businesses often close out when markets weaken to a point as to no longer be viable. Example: Furniture Outlet Stores. :(

Well I call that negative thinking Ron.There is always room for improvement with any product as FeelThere have proven, but if that's not in your plans then 'C'est-la-vie'.Edit, Just wondering how many FSX users use Vatsim?

Your missing the point, FSX addon market is booming and it is not that there is no FS9 market, its that it is so small in relation for thier project that they will make little on it. Its not that no one uses FS9 anymore, Its just none of the FS9 users want to buy anything from the developers. FSX people are the only people buying things at the moment. Once the FSX Payware and Freeware markets become as saturated as the FS9 market then they will start seeing thier Return on Investment drop just like it did on the FS9 market.

I'm not missing the point, and my bank account (and wife) begs to differ. As an FS9 user I buy as much as the aftermarket is allowing. Hard to buy products for FS9 that are developed for FSX only.Again, it's all a moot point and none of our ramblings will have any impact on that. That much has been made crystal clear.

Well I call that negative thinking Ron.There is always room for improvement with any product as FeelThere have proven, but if that's not in your plans then 'C'est-la-vie'.Edit, Just wondering how many FSX users use Vatsim?

Hmm, my answer was tongue in cheek to the poster who speculated on the future condition of the FS Market. It was not a serious answer at all. :( Facts are that FT is subject to the same market forces as anyone else and we've seen no evidence that they have any sort of advantage over others in that regard.Care to elaborate on your contention that "FT has proven things with the FS9 market"" :(

FS9 isn't selling much of anything these days. People just aren't purchasing for FS9 at a level to cover the cost of development for it.Our Citation X 2.0 was pretty much spit on by the FS9 crowd. *shrug*

I just updated the Citation X 2.0 version with the latest update hoping to see the VC updates (didn't read the fine print). Serious disappointment something as little as VC glass texture didn't make it into the FS9 version. PMDG did the same thing with cutting out window trimming with their FS9 MD11. Little things like this that was once common place for FS9 aircraft are being omitted in the name of improved performance in FS9 (not saying this is ES's reasoning). Nothing at this point effect FS9 performance on today's machines... If your going to gut basic things like glass texture that by now is standard in most all new aircraft released, you can't complain about lack of sales. I love the many advancements of the CXv2 (latest SP) but little things that otherwise would be nit picky is just plain aggravating when I'm seeing them in the FSX only model. I'm sorry to say this but if I had of known there were no VC enhancements I wouldn't have upgraded my CX v2 to the latest version. For some people this same logic holds true in a purchasing decision. All the goodies are held out (not matter how small) for the FSX version. It's almost like telling customers if you want the full product get FSX. That kind of logic turns allot of people away.

That Airsimmer poll is hardly conclusive evidence; clearly a poll on a site that only makes an FS9 product is going to have more FS9 users vote on it, since FSX users have little/no reason to be there.I took this screenshot of Air Hauler's radar five minutes ago, and of the 35 people it was tracking, 23 of them were using FSX, which makes it about 2 to 1 in favour of FSX by my reckoning, and it's usually a lot less FS9 users than that if you want the truth.FS9 is still a usable sim, but from what I can see of things, there's a bigger market for FSX by quite a long way, so you really can't blame developers going with that.Al

I just updated the Citation X 2.0 version with the latest update hoping to see the VC updates (didn't read the fine print). Serious disappointment something as little as VC glass texture didn't make it into the FS9 version. PMDG did the same thing with cutting out window trimming with their FS9 MD11. Little things like this that was once common place for FS9 aircraft are being omitted in the name of improved performance in FS9 (not saying this is ES's reasoning). Nothing at this point effect FS9 performance on today's machines... If your going to gut basic things like glass texture that by now is standard in most all new aircraft released, you can't complain about lack of sales. I love the many advancements of the CXv2 (latest SP) but little things that otherwise would be nit picky is just plain aggravating when I'm seeing them in the FSX only model. I'm sorry to say this but if I had of known there were no VC enhancements I wouldn't have upgraded my CX v2 to the latest version. For some people this same logic holds true in a purchasing decision. All the goodies are held out (not matter how small) for the FSX version. It's almost like telling customers if you want the full product get FSX. That kind of logic turns allot of people away.

Dillon, you've misunderstood our posts from the beginning. We've shed not one tear over poor FS9 sales of this or any of our products.There has been no "complaint" about lack of FS9 sales. We've simply acknowledged the real disparity in FS9 to FSX sales that ALL devs that we speak with have watched for nearly 24 months. If you had access to numbers by your favorite FT Group we suspect they would acknowledge the same disparity but that is not likely to happen is it?Further to the point, we do not expect FS9 users to expand on their FS9 purchases given their statements in this very discussion. You see, from our perspective this has never been about one product but rather about an entire line of products. :( The information on the FS9 Hotfix 1.84 is and has been clearly outlined for quite some time so it's difficult to see how you've missed it.Nonetheless, FS9 Hotfix 1.84 fixes all known issues and adds improved HyperGuage Technology for improved Fluidity and FPS within FS9.In addition, FS9 Hotfix 1.84 costs owners absolutely nothing. Eaglesoft Citation X Extreme 2.0 for FS9 won an Avsim Gold Star Award and is now considerd completed as we move forward on all other project fronts. :(

"Market forces" in the true sense of the word are apparently not under discussion here. When people extrapolate that what one person does with "their bank account" should somehow be relevant to a developer's marketing decisions, or that "poll results that have been unanimous across multiple user sites" remotely qualify as market research (results that if taken in total would likely not represent 1/10 of 1% of the potential market, and that are in fact extremely skewed from reflecting total market realities just from the transparent filters in, for example, a poll on a site selling an aircraft for FS9), no wonder they characterize developers as they do since those developers have not had the market foresight to make them their single "target" market, or accept their opinions as fact-based research on which to make life and death business decisions.It's very easy to pilot from the jump seat when it's not your butt who is responsible for the safety of the aircraft. It's a little different feeling, and just a bit more pressure, when your opinions become decisions with real consequences. Maybe we ought to give those guys actually driving the benefit of the doubt and consider that perhaps since they are looking out the window they see a thing or two that we don't. I am grateful that we have a few people left willing to tolerate all the speculative, if well intentioned, opinions and second guessing. Roy Holley

Hmm, my answer was tongue in cheek to the poster who speculated on the future condition of the FS Market. It was not a serious answer at all. :( Facts are that FT is subject to the same market forces as anyone else and we've seen no evidence that they have any sort of advantage over others in that regard.Care to elaborate on your contention that "FT has proven things with the FS9 market"" :(

Bad example. Starbucks is very well known to get rid of great selling products for absolutely no reason

You have access to Starbucks sales figures - or that that claim on a par with those that developers who chose FSX only have "absolutely no reason" for their decisions?

lol!

I'm a rhino too.I have FS9 and FSX and use both. Mostly FS9. I buy FS9 products, most recently EHAM from Aerosoft. I think developers should do whatever they want to do. If they make the wrong decision, their sales figures will show this and, if they are smart enough, they will make the necessary changes.I hope everyone has a great weekend :-)

lol!

Another FS9 Rhino over here. :(

You have access to Starbucks sales figures - or that that claim on a par with those that developers who chose FSX only have "absolutely no reason" for their decisions?

I personally don't, but my wife does. And through her, I get to hear about them quite frequently. But in all honesty, there's no need for the sarcasm.While I agree that the example given by Dave wasn't the best, there are plenty of other examples out there that are along the same lines at what he was posting.Here is a better (unbiased) example taken from the same thread."Hello !I don't know if a poll here is a good way to find out who is using FS9 or FSX.I took this screenshot a few weeks ago. It's from IvAe and shows statistics about pilot client software on the IVAO network:As you can see, most pilots are still using FS9, not FSX:IvAp 1.3.* and 1.4.* are FS2004 users: 69%IvAp 1.9.* are FSX users: 29%Feel free to download IvAe and check it every day, but more than 3 years after the FSX release, most IVAO pilots are still using FS9.I don't know if it's the same on VATSIM. Is there any tool that can show this ?OK this does not mean that the FS9 market is bigger, but if you want to make an add-on for advanced simmers (flying online for human and "as real as it gets" ATC), then FS9 seems to be the right place.But of course, this is slowly changing, and more and more people will use FSX, X-Plane or FlightGear.Happy flying ! :("Matt

The market share TODAY for FSX vs FS9 is really not very significant- what is important is the relative market share for each, a couple of years from now. The developers appear to be placing some heavy bets on the outcome of this struggle.We all might be wise to review the case of "New Coke"- where some pretty astute marketeers placed very heavy wagers on a changing public taste.They were wrong. Alex Reid(Search for "New Coke" in Wikipedia if you are under 40!)