Brandon Austin said to take advantage of all of XP 10's features, a quad core is recommended. That's like cranking up all the sliders in FSX to MAX.You're saying you can see MS Flight outperforming XP 10? And you admit you don't know much about it. Even the system specs for MS flight haven't been announced. You give unsubstantiated statements a new meaning.G

Sheesh! Why do I say anything?I'm just saying at this point, it seems that not the average person can use X-Plane 10, as it will be so powerful. We don't know much on Flight yet, but they don't seem like they are putting thousands of features in it. But we'll wait and see.

Sheesh! Why do I say anything?I'm just saying at this point, it seems that not the average person can use X-Plane 10, as it will be so powerful. We don't know much on Flight yet, but they don't seem like they are putting thousands of features in it. But we'll wait and see.

Brandon, I'm not attacking you personally. I'm attacking your statements. (I'm sure you're a cool dude) It's ok to say "I wonder if Flight will run better than X Plane" or "We'll see if X Plane can outperform Flight". But to come out and say Flight will outperform XP10 when you have sketchy details about Flight (at best), when Austin posted an entire forum post detailing what XP 10 can do and will run on, is unfair to X Plane 10 and to those possibly considering purchasing XP 10. 1 negative comment about something will make the average Joe think twice about anything.I'm a very big believer in corroborating statements with reference material. If that's not possible, better to ask questions than make statements based on assumptions. The latter is a very shaky foundation.I've been a developer for XP 9 for over a year now and have had SOME info on XP 10 through developer circles. It will definitely make people look twice.All good and still friends.G

OK. :( (I don't really have anything to say )

First of all it's a MAC product... that already turns off 90% of the user base I hate to say it. The fact that Austin doesn't even test his Windows builds is enough to turn me off completely.You really don't need us to bring down the product, Austin does a fine job on his own. And the last two years he's done nothing but talk about the Iphone... so I'm sorry MS has had at least 5 software engineers that we all know about working on FS and FS only. Some even releasing SDK updates...

Brandon, I'm not attacking you personally. I'm attacking your statements. (I'm sure you're a cool dude) It's ok to say "I wonder if Flight will run better than X Plane" or "We'll see if X Plane can outperform Flight". But to come out and say Flight will outperform XP10 when you have sketchy details about Flight (at best), when Austin posted an entire forum post detailing what XP 10 can do and will run on, is unfair to X Plane 10 and to those possibly considering purchasing XP 10. 1 negative comment about something will make the average Joe think twice about anything.I'm a very big believer in corroborating statements with reference material. If that's not possible, better to ask questions than make statements based on assumptions. The latter is a very shaky foundation.I've been a developer for XP 9 for over a year now and have had SOME info on XP 10 through developer circles. It will definitely make people look twice.All good and still friends.G

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. We all know where pre-release hype of products have gotten us before. Let's wait til we see the sim in action, before we start singing it's praises! That goes for MS Flight as well!

First of all it's a MAC product... that already turns off 90% of the user base I hate to say it. The fact that Austin doesn't even test his Windows builds is enough to turn me off completely.You really don't need us to bring down the product, Austin does a fine job on his own. And the last two years he's done nothing but talk about the Iphone... so I'm sorry MS has had at least 5 software engineers that we all know about working on FS and FS only. Some even releasing SDK updates...

XP hater be you?

Nah not at all... plenty of room for 3rd place...

Nah not at all... plenty of room for 3rd place...

Ok whatever.

First of all it's a MAC product... that already turns off 90% of the user base I hate to say it. The fact that Austin doesn't even test his Windows builds is enough to turn me off completely.You really don't need us to bring down the product, Austin does a fine job on his own. And the last two years he's done nothing but talk about the Iphone... so I'm sorry MS has had at least 5 software engineers that we all know about working on FS and FS only. Some even releasing SDK updates...

*sigh*X-Plane works on Mac, Windows and Linux. The fact that t was made on a Mac, does not mean that it is inferior to a sim that was made on Windows (FS9/FSX). It also doesn't mean it is better. It actually means nothing at all... the only important thing is if the program was intelligently designed, so that it can support mainstream modern-day computers, not super machines that people will only have in three years time.I have been debating whether to buy X-plane. It'll depend on what version 10 will eventually bring and at what FPS cost. Personally, I hate the idea of having only 20 AI aircraft. I want to have my airports filled. Plus, although more and more quality aircraft are released, I'll still miss some key aircraft. Whatever happens, FS9 and FSX will always stay - n o way I'm dumping them. The best thing about X-plane, by far, I my opinion, is that it'll work on my Mac. Thus I can do some nice flying without having to restart my computer and start Windows, which is usually what keeps me from flying. I know, I'm terribly lazy...

*sigh*X-Plane works on Mac, Windows and Linux. The fact that t was made on a Mac, does not mean that it is inferior to a sim that was made on Windows (FS9/FSX). It also doesn't mean it is better. It actually means nothing at all... the only important thing is if the program was intelligently designed, so that it can support mainstream modern-day computers, not super machines that people will only have in three years time.I have been debating whether to buy X-plane. It'll depend on what version 10 will eventually bring and at what FPS cost. Personally, I hate the idea of having only 20 AI aircraft. I want to have my airports filled. Plus, although more and more quality aircraft are released, I'll still miss some key aircraft. Whatever happens, FS9 and FSX will always stay - n o way I'm dumping them. The best thing about X-plane, by far, I my opinion, is that it'll work on my Mac. Thus I can do some nice flying without having to restart my computer and start Windows, which is usually what keeps me from flying. I know, I'm terribly lazy...

Oh no... I have no problems of it being made on a MAC either, ANSI C++ and OpenGL lends itself to that very easily. I just don't like the fact that it's not tested on the PC before the betas go out, thats what makes it MAC centric in the sense that every other OS is "use at your own risk". So if I have a bug, I have to go out of my way to actually report it, because the author will never find it himself. It should be the other way around where Austin is the first one to know.....FSX is limited to 96 aircraft I believe, at least FS9 is, all of them with no flight model. I think what Austin means is 20 of those AI aircraft will be interacting physically with each other and their environment. The only thing I would worry about is actually finding 20 A.I. aircraft created for X-plane. :)

....FSX is limited to 96 aircraft I believe, at least FS9 is, all of them with no flight model. I think what Austin means is 20 of those AI aircraft will be interacting physically with each other and their environment. The only thing I would worry about is actually finding 20 A.I. aircraft created for X-plane. :)

FS9 may be limited to 96, but FSX can have much more, look at my screen shots above! One user reported over 1000 AI traffic, although I haven't seen it that high myself. I think the most I seen in traffic explorer was 420+.

I just don't like the fact that it's not tested on the PC before the betas go out, thats what makes it MAC centric in the sense that every other OS is "use at your own risk". So if I have a bug, I have to go out of my way to actually report it, because the author will never find it himself.

Yeah that's what betas are for, so the testers can report bugs. If you don't want to be a tester then don't download the betas. :(

Oh no... I have no problems of it being made on a MAC either, ANSI C++ and OpenGL lends itself to that very easily. I just don't like the fact that it's not tested on the PC before the betas go out, thats what makes it MAC centric in the sense that every other OS is "use at your own risk". So if I have a bug, I have to go out of my way to actually report it, because the author will never find it himself. It should be the other way around where Austin is the first one to know.....FSX is limited to 96 aircraft I believe, at least FS9 is, all of them with no flight model. I think what Austin means is 20 of those AI aircraft will be interacting physically with each other and their environment. The only thing I would worry about is actually finding 20 A.I. aircraft created for X-plane. :)

Well that's the point I guess... Do I want 20 AI aircraft that behave absolutely realistically, or do I want simply lots of AI aircraft that fill up my airports? I go for the latter. I couldn't care less how realistic they are, I simply want them to exist. I want my own plane to be realistic, is all... And I guess you have a point about the betas. I didn't actually know he didn't test before sending out the betas. it seems to me that he is required to test them himself first, if only to see whether the program starts up and the most basic things function correctly. Oh well, if I were to get X-plane, I'd only use it on my Mac anyway, so i guess the problem doesn't really exist for me personally, though I can understand your reservations.

And I guess you have a point about the betas. I didn't actually know he didn't test before sending out the betas. it seems to me that he is required to test them himself first, if only to see whether the program starts up and the most basic things function correctly.

How does Veeray know what Austin (or the rest of the XP team) does before releasing a beta?I use Win7 and have never had a problem with a beta starting up or with most things functioning correctly so they must be doing something right.Seems to me Veeray is just an Austin and XP "basher".

How does Veeray know what Austin (or the rest of the XP team) does before releasing a beta?I use Win7 and have never had a problem with a beta starting up or with most things functioning correctly so they must be doing something right.Seems to me Veeray is just an Austin and XP "basher".

To say he is a basher because he says Austin might not test the betas seems to me like you're jumping to conclusions... I'll say I don't believe he doesn't test them. I'm quite sure he does, but perhaps not as thoroughly as he should? Anyway, I don't care, as long as the released product works well.