>This doesn't mean that the person posting the suggestion>should be villified. All your attitude does, Michael, is>dissuade Dillion and others from posting suggestions which may>or may not help others. And this is not what this forum is>supposed to be about.How was his response a vilification? He made no vicious or defamatory statements. Some of you need to lighten up and not make the slightest differing comment or criticism seem like it's the end of the world.As for FS Autostart, it takes a MINUTE, if that, to do what it does.

>I noticed your using the WD Raptor harddrive.I've been>thinking about getting one of these things.Does it make a>diffrence to the performance of FS as oppose to something like>what I'm using now.WD 120G with 8mb cache,72,000 RPM(I>think).I love this HD, it is fast and very quiet. But how much performance it gives you in FS2004 - I have no clue. I got this whole system so I really can't relate to what I had before (which was very old).Michael J.WinXP-Home,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8, Radeon X800 Pro,WD 36GB Raptor,1 GB PC3200 http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

I didn't even read the whole post - too long :) - but just my addition for tonight: I use FSAutostart, and it quits EVERYTHING that can be quitted. Even explorer.exe. And starts all the apps I need - SB, Adobe (charts), ACARS etc etc...As for the services, I left running only those for which FSAutostart says "leave running".FS has never been running better. Absolutely no stutters and only "low FPS" (= lower than 35fps locked) when I get into some addon areas.And if I say, need "windows" -> task manager, new task, explorer.exe... and then afterwards just quit it.

"I love this HD, it is fast and very quiet. But how much performance it gives you in FS2004 - I have no clue. I got this whole system so I really can't relate to what I had before (which was very old)."I might be able to assist here.Like Michael, I think the Raptors are outstanding drives. I recently replaced my original 37Gb with the current 74Gb, and the latter is even better than the original. The 37Gb is now in my wife's computer and doing just as well for her as it did for me.The Raptor's have little effect on FS9 performance. If a computer is configured correctly (and has more than 512Mb of RAM for this sim) it should not be hitting the hard drive much to access virtual memory. Where I do notice the difference is in app load times. The Raptors provide app load times that are 1/4-1/3 faster than my previous IDE drive (40Gb 7200RPM Maxtor).So, apps will load quicker but performance in the sim will increase little.Hope this helps,Greg

Anthony,Yours is the first post to "villify" anyone.Glenn"If God would have wanted man to fly He would have given him more money"

Thanks Anthony for your post... You said everything I was going to say and more. I've stopped trying to argue with people, I've found it's useless. If I can help one person out of 20 that's fine with me. If I find something that seemed to work for me I'll make sure I let others know and people can take from it what they want...I'm too busy now trying to figure out the bug in my PSS A320 and getting my overdue freeware Gulfstream released. Give me your email Anthony and I'll send you a copy of my GV project before I upload it to Avsim and Flightsim.com. I would like to get your opinion on it.... :-)

>Thanks Anthony for your post... You said everything I was>going to say and more.So you also think that Michal's post was a vilification? Actually, that doesn't really surprise me. Actually, I'd be interested to know what your "more" was.

I won't presume to speak for Michael J., but my response to this thread was not meant to be argumentative. I was simply reporting what I have experienced when tuning Windows XP for FS9. I've done the Black Viper tweaks, and I've probably tried every tip and tweak offered by well-intentioned persons in this forum and elsewhere. And why not? The prospect of gaining even 1-2 extra fps is irresistible to me and to others I'm sure.The fact that nothing has worked for me is not anyone's fault and is certainly nothing to do with Dillon. These things may work for others, the sheer amount of information available suggests that they have some merit for someone somewhere, but they are not going to provide the same results for everyone. I'm tired of re-formatting and re-installing Windows after applying performance tweaks, when I make changes XP gets cranky and eventually FS9 runs worse. Putting things back to default doesn't help, system restore doesn't help and then I'm back to the installation CD and starting all over. My comment about new hardware was not tongue in cheek or sarcastic, and I didn

I would consider utterly ridiculous to spend even 15 secs trying to explain myself. Some people have really very low threshold of sensitivity. Edam and Douglas explained it well. My 15 secs are up ;-)Michael J.WinXP-Home,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8, Radeon X800 Pro,WD 36GB Raptor,1 GB PC3200 http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

Michael called Dillion's post (and past posts) "WORTHLESS" because it didn't work on his computer. HIS computer. If that is "constructive criticism" then we're all doomed. Look at is simply.....you make a suggesion. One person tries it and it doesn't work for him. And on that basis the entire suggestion is worthless. Never mind the fact that it worked for the original poster, and it may work for others. And after that, the original poster is supposed to take it as "constructive criticism". And what's strange is that no body else here, except Dillion, sees a problem with the suggestions being called "WORTHLESS" based on one man's NASA sponsored, Pentagon sponsored, PC World Magazine sanctioned, single computer survey.Hmmm....... Good luck with that A320 Dillion. And if you don't want to post any more suggestions, then you can always PM me with them. That way, you don't upset others when they try it and it doesn't work for them.

You're right David, I went through the blackviper site and followed the guidelines for disabling various services (including XP themes) and it had a huge effect on my system. Now I've got a lean, mean, simming machine. Very informative Web site, totally reccommend it to anyone that wants to get the most out of his/her machine. There are a lot of services that load in Windows that you don't need, and that site explains it all to you.As for Norton -- you gotta get off that one man. Real hog. I've found Kaspersky AV coupled with Sygate personal firewall to be a nice light combo.Take care,Greghttp://members.rogers.com/gmoffatt/images/ERJ_CRT.jpg

I agree with Michael, nothing seems to improve theframerates on my system or at least not that I'venoticed.I've tried every tweak going since I got my copyof MSFS2004 and I've not got any improvement inframerate what so ever!

>>>I noticed your using the WD Raptor harddrive.I've been>>thinking about getting one of these things.Does it make a>>diffrence to the performance of FS as oppose to something>like>>what I'm using now.WD 120G with 8mb cache,72,000 RPM(I>>think).>>I love this HD, it is fast and very quiet. But how much>performance it gives you in FS2004 - I have no clue. I got>this whole system so I really can't relate to what I had>before (which was very old).>>>Michael J.>WinXP-Home,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8, Radeon X800 Pro,WD 36GB>Raptor,1 GB PC3200 >http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpgMichal did you just say the 36 Raptor was quiet??? Did you have 15000 RPM SCSI drives before ;)It

"It

I don