I'm afraid to say you don't know what Bootcamp is, otherwise you wouldn't have said that it was a guest operating system. It's far from a guest operating system. Nothing is virtualised.

 

Fair enough, I didn't know and I assumed. I have since run off to the Apple and wiki pages to educate myself. Thank you for telling me that I was incorrect in my assumption, otherwise I'd still be thinking it was a VM-type deal.

 

While it's not as limited as I'd thought, it's still being forced to run in a less-than-optimum situation. Have you tried running FS Tweaks to up frame rates?

Fair enough, I didn't know and I assumed. I have since run off to the Apple and wiki pages to educate myself. Thank you for telling me that I was incorrect in my assumption, otherwise I'd still be thinking it was a VM-type deal.

 

While it's not as limited as I'd thought, it's still being forced to run in a less-than-optimum situation. Have you tried running FS Tweaks to up frame rates?

 

Sorry if I came across to harsh when I explained. However, I still don't see how it's being forced into a less than optimum situation? It's running natively on the same hardware as many other computers. There's no difference at all.

I don´t see the problem, do you want it wraped in a fine box or just head on?

Well I just do it head on: the 2D panels are history and your computer is to slow (according to your self), buy something faster or play something slower!

 

If someone whants to play FSX with heavy add-ons you need a BIG engine that can trottle up (real trottle=INTEL CPU and nVidia Graphics).

How is that wrong? Why let a forum devolve into a never-ending fight because there's no "right" answer. There's either agree with PMDG or don't agree. There's no sense in discussing it.

 

Exactly!

 

At least Ryan agreed with me on closing that topic. My eyes, it was pointless!

Yet you participate in every 2D panel topic. <_<

lol this made me spill my drink lol, thats why its called a forum you comment on things and if you dont like what he says than don't read the thread than

It makes no difference if you run FSX on a Mac with bootcamp to boot Win7x64 or an Intel PC with a native single install of Win7x64... the issue here is that the OP has too little graphic adapter power to run the 3D environment. You run FSX on an i5 Intel with integrated graphics, you will also get relatively poor performance.

 

The only way things are going to get better is to run with the current standard, namely an i7, maybe a little overclocked, with a halfway decent graphics adapter and not an integrated one in the CPU or chipset...

 

Why this discussion starts up again and again, the Lord himself shall only know... The company has decided to do it this way. They have a good enough reason for themselves to have done it. Perhaps it is to do with market share, and the 2D supporter group is just not big enough to throw the decision in favour of the additional workload for full 2D environment...

 

I for one am very happy with the way the current 3D VCs look. With the right monitor and even additional hardware/software like TrackIR or EZDok, it gives me much more of the feeling of "being there" than a 2D flat panel would ever give me, but that is just my opinion. You are of course entitled to your opinion as well...

 

However, we do know what the official answer is, it is here in the forum and only a search away...

 

Perhaps this thread should be put to bed like many of its predecessors...

 

A

The NGX was the last PMDG plane with a 2D panel. But, if you get TrackIR, you'll forget the 2D.

therefore I automatically will not be buying it (same with the 777).

 

So I'm left with only an 8 year old 747 with just a 'model' -8X as an addon, which, quite frankly, is sub-par compared to what you will be offering.

 

Perfectly solid. What exactly are we discussing again?

Sorry if I came across to harsh when I explained. However, I still don't see how it's being forced into a less than optimum situation? It's running natively on the same hardware as many other computers. There's no difference at all.

 

It's okay. I don't think it was harsh at all. It was to the point, and that's how I normally phrase things. I was being honest when I was thanking you for actually telling me I was wrong. Some people would just let it slide and I wouldn't have had the opportunity to learn otherwise.

 

Now that the bootcamp issue is cleared up, I understand that it's no more restricted than OSX in its environment. Sorry for not clarifying. What I should've clarified is that the current implementation (running on your current hardware) is less-than-optimum. It's certainly not a poor situation if you can get those frames, but at the same time, it's not really intended for the processing FSX demands. Don't get me wrong, they're very capable computers, but the integrated graphics and the i5 are holding you back (more the integrated card than the GPU).

 

Anyway, that's side-stepping the main issue. In the interest of full disclosure, when I was in the same hardware-limited situation (except with an IBM laptop - much less capable), I was making the same argument.

It's okay. I don't think it was harsh at all. It was to the point, and that's how I normally phrase things. I was being honest when I was thanking you for actually telling me I was wrong. Some people would just let it slide and I wouldn't have had the opportunity to learn otherwise.

 

Now that the bootcamp issue is cleared up, I understand that it's no more restricted than OSX in its environment. Sorry for not clarifying. What I should've clarified is that the current implementation (running on your current hardware) is less-than-optimum. It's certainly not a poor situation if you can get those frames, but at the same time, it's not really intended for the processing FSX demands. Don't get me wrong, they're very capable computers, but the integrated graphics and the i5 are holding you back (more the integrated card than the GPU).

 

Anyway, that's side-stepping the main issue. In the interest of full disclosure, when I was in the same hardware-limited situation (except with an IBM laptop - much less capable), I was making the same argument.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, I'm glad you understand I wasn't trying to be confrontational. I usually have trouble getting my point across in a kind way :Nerd:

 

I priced up a decent machine, and I'm looking at a budget of around £750. I guess I'll have to get saving :LMAO:

 

I've decided for now I might aswell actually buy the current 747x + 8x as it's still a very decent aircraft, though it may not get much use with my VA as most of the non-freighter flights are long-haul, and I can't just leave the plane whislt I'm sleeping for the trans-atlantic flight!

This has turned into the topic that just got locked..