Hi,If we did not have the ability to work around FSX's technical limitations (due to the EULA) we would be without many third party addons. As far as reverse engineering, decompiling or disassembling the software, none of that was done. He edited a text type document, he didn't decompile or disassemble a binary executable type file.If any problem exists with the original post, it would be a copy and past of the entire SwarmCloud.fx file, but that's it.

Hate to be a party pooper in this, and I applaud your ingenuity in finding all these tweaks, but by publicly posting this I believe this maybe one tweak too far. This file is clearly copyrighted (It states it right at the beginning) This comes very close if not crosses the line into system code, since it's not dealing with not just a model or scenery area, but with changes to the graphic engine itself. This would violate the EULA which clearly statesYou may notwork around any technical limitations in the software;reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, except and only to the extent that applicable law expressly permits, despite this limitation;Setting changes is one thing, but code is something else!Tom

The shaders are already in source form.MAYBE he shouldn't post them in it's entirety... but doing changes to the shader files is fine... FSWC does the same.Besides, EULA.............

Hate to be a party pooper in this, and I applaud your ingenuity in finding all these tweaks, but by publicly posting this I believe this maybe one tweak too far. This file is clearly copyrighted (It states it right at the beginning) This comes very close if not crosses the line into system code, since it's not dealing with not just a model or scenery area, but with changes to the graphic engine itself. This would violate the EULA which clearly statesYou may notwork around any technical limitations in the software;reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, except and only to the extent that applicable law expressly permits, despite this limitation;Setting changes is one thing, but code is something else!Tom

Hmmm... true perhaps, but it's up to the Microsoft legal department to take that position, and then to request ******* ceases/desists. I would gamble it's not worth their time, and that it will, in fact be good publicity and will lead to greater sales of FSX. Besides which - this is a very minor change which gives a marginal performance boost.

The shaders are already in source form.He might really not want to post them in it's entirety... but doing changes to the shader files is fine... FSWC does the same.

Just because a file is in source does not remove it's copyright protections, or negate the conditions in the EULA. I do agree though that posting the file in it's entirety is the biggest problem with this post. Also just because other 3rd party does this also doesn't necessarily mean they are right either. Just because "we" say it's fine doesn't legally mean it is. The condition in the EULA is rather broad so it's really in the interpretation on what it means. That usually comes down to what the developer or publisher meant it to be.

Hmmm... true perhaps, but it's up to the Microsoft legal department to take that position, and then to request ******* ceases/desists. I would gamble it's not worth their time, and that it will, in fact be good publicity and will lead to greater sales of FSX. Besides which - this is a very minor change which gives a marginal performance boost.

I agree, but I wouldn't want to be in a position to have the possibility of MS coming after me, and sometimes, they just don't ask for a cease and desists, especially if the damage (meaning in this case the distribution) is already done.

As the discoverer of the initial "cloud popping fix" with newmaterialusage=false etc a couple of years ago, I just had to try out your new

Hi Mike,wow.. Didn't know it was you, thanks for that then.. and yes, unfortunately you are right, the flashing is still there so back to 'False' swarmcloud.fx is part of the new mod I'll be releasing, fully SM3.0.I tried (unsuccesufully) in the past to change eveyrthing to SM3.0 but had some problems, but they were due to how SM3 works, so I simply applied the required changes and voila ;)Take care... and will most definitely keep the sleuthing :) the beauty of not being NDA bound I guess... ;)

Hate to be a party pooper in this, and I applaud your ingenuity in finding all these tweaks, but by publicly posting this I believe this maybe one tweak too far. This file is clearly copyrighted (It states it right at the beginning) This comes very close if not crosses the line into system code, since it's not dealing with not just a model or scenery area, but with changes to the graphic engine itself. This would violate the EULA which clearly statesYou may notwork around any technical limitations in the software;reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, except and only to the extent that applicable law expressly permits, despite this limitation;Setting changes is one thing, but code is something else!Tom

Tom,Please, I urge you to read this:http://blogs.msdn.com/sebby1234/archive/20...-be-edited.aspxthe purpose of 'modding' to enhance a product or application is ages old ;) add on developers, 'hack' into .air files or write programs to edit mdl or bgl files, they do it all the time. even a BMP is considered to be copyrighted :) yet, we 'modify' them, and SELL them :) here's an actual 'example' of 'distribution' of copyright material (from Flight1) no difference :) EULA covers them all.http://www.flight1software.com/fsxtools/f1_fsx_vcrainfix.exeappreciate your concern Tom, take care.

JesusWhilst I have tried all of your tweaks, so far, I have gained nothing from them.Whilst that's disappointing for me, I've found them all interesting enough to try and learned a great deal from exploring the rationale and reading posts from others who have done so.Keep them coming. Clearly they are helping many and are obvioulsy well thought out.How many more ideas do you have which you haven't published?As for Microsoft, i can't imagine for one minute they will be complaining when they clearly have no interest in supporting or developing the application themselves.Look forward to your next idea.IAN

As for Microsoft, i can't imagine for one minute they will be complaining when they clearly have no interest in supporting or developing the application themselves.

They should actually be quite happy with *******' tweaks :) He has proven that it is possible to have FSX running stable and this might convince FS9 users to make the step towards FSX and thus generating sales ;)This topic has made me very curious what all this shader stuff (the file that is going to be uploaded somehwere in the coming days?) is about and how it is going to affect FSX :)

Just because a file is in source does not remove it's copyright protections, or negate the conditions in the EULA. I do agree though that posting the file in it's entirety is the biggest problem with this post. Also just because other 3rd party does this also doesn't necessarily mean they are right either. Just because "we" say it's fine doesn't legally mean it is. The condition in the EULA is rather broad so it's really in the interpretation on what it means. That usually comes down to what the developer or publisher meant it to be.

If this is true, then ANY repaint of a commercial airliner is a violation!

This topic has made me very curious what all this shader stuff (the file that is going to be uploaded somehwere in the coming days?) is about and how it is going to affect FSX :)

In fact, the one received by the BETA testers did NOT include this new swarmcloud.fx with SM3.0One more thing... do not expect 'miracles' changing a shader version is like probably changing a 'card' you wont notice a huge difference in IQ if you swap an ATI with an nVidia, at least, not a huge one, so if 'anything' this will marginally improve perf (1 or 2 FPS max) and some will be able to see a slight improvement in quality (specially water).I don't know what the impact (in IQ) would be if add-on developers created effects optimized for SM3.0, no idea... but with the mod, this is at least a possibility. So, this is 'NOT' a must have mod, its more like an experimentation one, I however use it for daily flying :)

If this is true, then ANY repaint of a commercial airliner is a violation!

Technically it is! AA doesn't allow payware repaints of their livery, and only after a public outcry they backed off that stance for freeware. They get around this now by offering it after the point of sale, which is a really gray area, but so far AA hasn't complained. This is why Aces used fictitious airline names in the original product. On the Train Sim side Union Pacific also took the same position. As for this issue, I read the Blog post ******* posted and it clearly states changes to this file is not supported, but leaves it at do it at your own risk. So if ******* and everyone else is ok with this so be it. For me I tried it, and it did not work. I got Black skies, missing clouds, and loss of reflection in the water when set to 2XMid. (Didn't try higher settings). Even after commenting the Bump statement out. It's probably something with my card which is a 9800GTX card. (Although it should handle Shader 3 as it's rated as a Shader 4card)

Alright thanks for the clarification! Still looking forward to its payoff though! :)

JesusWhilst I have tried all of your tweaks, so far, I have gained nothing from them.Whilst that's disappointing for me, I've found them all interesting enough to try and learned a great deal from exploring the rationale and reading posts from others who have done so.Keep them coming. Clearly they are helping many and are obvioulsy well thought out.How many more ideas do you have which you haven't published?As for Microsoft, i can't imagine for one minute they will be complaining when they clearly have no interest in supporting or developing the application themselves.Look forward to your next idea.IAN

Very well said Ian. Every morning, I check the forum, looking forward to another discovery. It tried the swarmcloud.fx tweak and did see an improvement as I could increase the cloud distance without a frame rate hit. The clouds look slightly different, perhaps more colours, perhaps puffier... I did not have the black sky issue but perhaps, I did not test it long enough.But what I enjoy the most is to see that some people in this hobby are still pushing the envelope and that FSX is certainly not dead ! So thank you *******. I don't know yet how far we'll go but I sure do enjoy the ride !

So thank you *******. I don't know yet how far we'll go but I sure do enjoy the ride !

We all do :) there's really not much performance tweaking left... shaders are the next frontier, and like Tom said, changing them is NOT supported... (not that MS supports FSX now anyway) but, if it can be done, and we can get a benefit out of it, I'll do it. Don't worry, you are in good hands, I'm a perfectionist at hearth, every problem users experienced I noticed them too (and fixed them) there are BETA testers using my shader tweak with great results :) so I'll be releasing them shorty.One more thing, it is 'possible' that ATI users see an improvement because of the most eficient shader model in use... so, who knows, maybe this is what the ATI needs to match the nVidias performance under heavy clouds ;) I would NOT use this 'mod' if I were using an older card, all BETA testers are using either GTX 285's or GTX 480's so there could be some problems using them with older hardware (thats why MS made them 1.1 and not 3.0 I guess)