Don't know much yet about Mac OS', but I get the sense their basic architecture seems more stable and less crash prone. I understand they don't have nearly the reliance on inclusion of so many dll's and other essentials that tie in applications to the OS/hardware. Because of this there is more reliance on the developer to publish the app essentially w/ all it needs. No registry! There are major architectural differences between the platforms, but I don't think this in any way precludes building a super stable core application that 3rd party devs could write for that would give end users broad customization controls, as we see in FSX. Aim for photorealism to the highest degree combined w/ 3D objects taken from huge libraries based on different regions of the world. Design the application to include a full array of SDKs:

• Landclass
• Terrain Mesh
• 3D object Libraries--regionally matched to Landclass characteristics geographically.
• ATC
• Aircraft
• Land & Water Traffic
• Weather & Graphics

The core platform would be designed from the start to:

• Use system hardware, multithreading/multicore to the max. Optimize code to run on a new highest end Mac Pro Simulator: 12 core support, etc etc.
• Utilize professional-grade highest end graphics
• Adhere to strict quality standards and code conformity

This product would be sold as a package w/ an intended service life of maybe 5-10y. If you know where you are going it's easier to get there! I'd easily cough up $6-10K to buy this platform, AND THEN cough up dough for the various scenery packages (ala Orbx, but at a much higher standard), aircraft, etc. as they come along. This concept teases out 3rd party devs because they know they will be able to count on a durable platform to write for. I think XPlane tries to do this, but they don't have the resources to make the complete software/hardware integration with excellent user-directed customization on a stable platform. There are a raft of FS enthusiasts on the planet. I think the business model could be huge!Noel

Edited January 6, 201214 yr by Noel

I am a huge fan of macs. I have a bunch of them and use them for everything but games. This is the trend I would like to continue with. While I can't say enough about macs for lots of things it stops when it comes to playing games on them. If you are looking to spend on high end stuff and pay top dollar the pc is where it is. You wont find the highend graphics on the mac that are used for games. I would run any and every other pice of software on them though.

Edited January 6, 201214 yr by JasonHarris

Noel. Most of what you wish for is already available (or under heavy development) for the mac with XPX.Take a look over on the Xplane forums for some more info. You might be pleasantly surprised.

" The Flight Of The Macintosh "" A Big Mac With A Helping Of Flightsim "" Apple's Will Fly "" How to land an Apple on a Big Mac "" Flight for OSXBox "Just a thought..........................

Edited January 6, 201214 yr by RYR738

Adding a bit to what I said. The mac, in this area, does not add any real advantage as a platform to build a simulator on. Thats primarily why I said no need to look there. For that kind of money you would get a better simulator spread across multiple machines using prepared and multi channel, xplane with multiple computers or fsx with wideview and multiple computers. 12 cpu's in one computer would probably be 10 wasted, whats the use of you only have one or two screens connected. Now, a few huge screens 40"+ and a few smaller screens for instruments, 3 computers with good graphics cards and you have something that a single computer with 4 or 12 cpu's cannot do, for the same price.

Edited January 6, 201214 yr by JasonHarris

12 cpu's in one computer would probably be 10 wasted, whats the use of you only have one or two screens connected. Now, a few huge screens 40"+ and a few smaller screens for instruments, 3 computers with good graphics cards and you have something that a single computer with 4 or 12 cpu's cannot do, for the same price.

I think what I was hinting at was having hardware/OS/application fully optimized which I think would be way easier to accomplish in the Mac world than Windows world. It seems conceivable to me that 12 cores or even 24 cores could be utilized were the OS & application designed from the start for it--but I don't know if OS X can support that. I see the Mac Pros have 12 core xenon processors I think.

" The Flight Of The Macintosh "" A Big Mac With A Helping Of Flightsim "" Apple's Will Fly "" How to land an Apple on a Big Mac "" Flight for OSXBox "Just a thought..........................

:(

Noel. Most of what you wish for is already available (or under heavy development) for the mac with XPX.Take a look over on the Xplane forums for some more info. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Hi Jason, do you have a link? Couldn't find anything on XPX . . .