Windows 8.1 - The Start Button Returns

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

 

 

They both run perfectly fine for me, except for the joystick loss issue, which is fixed by using FSUIPC. But Win 8 is Win7 SP2 with a terrible touch screen UI, which is easily ignored. It takes some research to completely disable UAC. You have to create a second boot option for safe boot, because the F8 key on boot is gone for 95% of the installed PC base. But all in all it's just Win 7 in an ill-fitting suit.

 

Your FSX runs on the 8.1 Preview? That's a first that I've heard of!

 

 

It's just that people have legitimate problems with the direction Microsoft is going for various reasons. The concern is universal yet some people have a somewhat blind support for this company no matter what they do. It's hard to get an objective viewpoint from them. What got me is most here use FSX and when Microsoft releases an OS that can't run the basic life blood of their hobby and this community and someone says that's O.k. I'll switch sims just to have the latest version of Windows is shocking... You would think anyone would say I'll stick with W7 to run the main thing I've invested in for years with countless add-ons. For many of us to throw away years of work just to have Windows 8.1 is unthinkable. Just like Flight was unthinkable to most if it didn't allow us to build on it.

For the sake of this hobby and giving FSX (let alone FS9) a few more years with the latest version of Windows I hope this is just a beta problem and will be fixed for the official release.

 

Again, my wanting to upgrade to 8.1 has NOTHING to do with Microsoft. The company is irrelevant. There are MANY people that want the latest versions of software. I am one of them. It's 2013. I have no problem moving to a new simulator (P3D v2 when it comes out). I have not invested an insane amount in FSX, so this wouldn't hurt me as much. You've go to move on eventually. Would you really want to be on Windows 7 20 years later just to be able to keep your add-ons from going to waste? A new sim platform, no matter how many add-ons you are throwing away, is something that many will want at some point anyway. When you look at games such as the upcoming Battlefield 4, FSX looks decades behind. There becomes a point when it is impractical to hold yourself back in technology to keep one thing working. For some, that point comes sooner than later.

[Dillon 2,197]

HughesMDflyer4, on 01 Jul 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

Again, my wanting to upgrade to 8.1 has NOTHING to do with Microsoft. The company is irrelevant. There are MANY people that want the latest versions of software. I am one of them. It's 2013. I have no problem moving to a new simulator (P3D v2 when it comes out). I have not invested an insane amount in FSX, so this wouldn't hurt me as much. You've go to move on eventually. Would you really want to be on Windows 7 20 years later just to be able to keep your add-ons from going to waste? A new sim platform, no matter how many add-ons you are throwing away, is something that many will want at some point anyway. When you look at games such as the upcoming Battlefield 4, FSX looks decades behind. There becomes a point when it is impractical to hold yourself back in technology to keep one thing working. For some, that point comes sooner than later.

2013 has nothing to do with simming, we have no viable replacement for FSX and when a developer like Outerra comes in and says we're interested in doing one many in the community shun the idea as their fine with their current incarnation of FSX. Concerning software across the board (X-Plane, P3D, etc) we have yet to see how tomorrows versions of these software options pan out. You may have other hobby interest but for the purpose of FS9/FSX if the OS isn't compatible it's a no go for everyone. Years have went by and people are still playing Falcon 4 which has actually stood the test of time. Mods have been created for it to somewhat bring it to today's graphic/feature level. For those into simming we may actually have FSX/W7 or our drives 10 years from now. I've been in Level-D 744 simulators that have FS2000 graphics, nothing near what we have in FS9/FSX (it actually humbled me as to what we have at our fingertips). If the goal is flight simming we have no choice if we're really into this hobby. If W8.1 proves not to work with FSX/FS9 this community won't use it because they can't. Battlefield 4 can look great but the fact is we have no GA sim equivalent nor is anyone willing to make one. Moving to the latest OS that's no longer compatible means moving out of the hobby if we go with your reasoning. I'm not telling you what to do it's just that when Microsoft releases something whether it be Flight or a version of Windows that doesn't work with what we all came here to enjoy your on board with it. You say you just want the latest and greatest (news flash) Flight Simming is no longer afforded that luxury. We are forced to stay with what works else our hobby is dead. Microsoft is a big key reason this has happened. Hopefully X-Plane get's better and has a future long after Austin puts it down. All other options don't come close at this point.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Your FSX runs on the 8.1 Preview? That's a first that I've heard of!

 

 

 

 

7 and 8. 8.1 is toxic to flight simming  ATM.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

2013 has nothing to do with simming, we have no viable replacement for FSX and when a developer like Outerra comes in and says we're interested in doing one many in the community shun the idea as their fine with their current incarnation of FSX. Concerning software across the board (X-Plane, P3D, etc) we have yet to see how tomorrows versions of these software options pan out. You may have other hobby interest but for the purpose of FS9/FSX if the OS isn't compatible it's a no go for everyone. Years have went by and people are still playing Falcon 4 which has actually stood the test of time. Mods have been created for it to somewhat bring it to today's graphic/feature level. For those into simming we may actually have FSX/W7 or our drives 10 years from now. I've been in Level-D 744 simulators that have FS2000 graphics, nothing near what we have in FS9/FSX (it actually humbled me as to what we have at our fingertips). If the goal is flight simming we have no choice if we're really into this hobby. If W8.1 proves not to work with FSX/FS9 this community won't use it because they can't. Battlefield 4 can look great but the fact is we have no GA sim equivalent nor is anyone willing to make one. Moving to the latest OS that's no longer compatible means moving out of the hobby if we go with your reasoning. I'm not telling you what to do it's just that when Microsoft releases something whether it be Flight or a version of Windows that doesn't work with what we all came here to enjoy your on board with it. You say you just want the latest and greatest (news flash) Flight Simming is no longer afforded that luxury. We are forced to stay with what works else our hobby is dead. Microsoft is a big key reason this has happened. Hopefully X-Plane get's better and has a future long after Austin puts it down. All other options don't come close at this point.

 

It would be quite a different story if there was no other platform, but the fact that there are other options out there doesn't really bother me, especially when one of the options is a better and continuing-to-be-developed version of FSX (Prepar3D).

 

That aside, I don't really like your statement that I am on board with whatever Microsoft releases. Once again, Microsoft is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to this situation. I DO NOT want to upgrade or update because of Microsoft. I was a strong supporter of Flight BEFORE the January 4th press release, BEFORE the financial model was publicly revealed.

 

If you still feel that I am a big Microsoft supporter, then I will leave it at that. I am done with this thread, but I will say that, with a company of that size, keeping a series such as flight simulator going is not a logical business decision. Do I like the decision? Of course not! But I can understand why they would not want to continue it. Flight simulator is a niche market. A huge corporation like Microsoft sees no financial gain from a flight simulator.

[Dillon 2,197]

but I will say that, with a company of that size, keeping a series such as flight simulator going is not a logical business decision. Do I like the decision? Of course not! But I can understand why they would not want to continue it. Flight simulator is a niche market. A huge corporation like Microsoft sees no financial gain from a flight simulator.

 

 

Even though companies like Lockheed and others are embracing the product. Major Level-D simulators were moving to use Flight Simulator's engine in their sims before Aces's closure. Companies like ATR were starting to warm up to FS, GA related magazines were constantly promoting it, and flight schools were training with the software among others. For some reason X-Plane was looked at as the more legitimate sim as Microsoft never pushed their sim for real world training use until FSX (or should I say it's hybrid counterpart). The jury is still out on P3D and many major developers like PMDG won't touch it. I wouldn't bet the farm on P3D when the company is shying away from embracing the sim for the common user. We really don't know where P3D will end up and I surly wouldn't bet the farm on it's future in our hobby.  There's allot in the way of training and general aviation interest that would be very profitable for Microsoft.  Instead of abandoning PC's in favor tablets Microsoft would enjoy a much better adoption rate for W8 if they released quality PC software like they once did.  Flight Simulator and other MS PC titles for years helped boost sales of their OS's.  You take that away you had better have one great version of Windows to offset the lack of content.  

 

By the way does P3D work in Windows 8.1?

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

Even though companies like Lockheed and others are embracing the product. Major Level-D simulators were moving to use Flight Simulator's engine in their sims before Aces's closure. Companies like ATR were starting to warm up to FS, GA related magazines were constantly promoting it, and flight schools were training with the software among others. For some reason X-Plane was looked at as the more legitimate sim as Microsoft never pushed their sim for real world training use until FSX (or should I say it's hybrid counterpart). The jury is still out on P3D and many major developers like PMDG won't touch it. I wouldn't bet the farm on P3D when the company is shying away from embracing the sim for the common user. We really don't know where P3D will end up and I surly wouldn't bet the farm on it's future in our hobby.  There's allot in the way of training and general aviation interest that would be very profitable for Microsoft.  Instead of abandoning PC's in favor tablets Microsoft would enjoy a much better adoption rate for W8 if they released quality PC software like they once did.  Flight Simulator and other MS PC titles for years helped boost sales of their OS's.  You take that away you had better have one great version of Windows to offset the lack of content.  

 

By the way does P3D work in Windows 8.1?

 

They've stated that they are still dedicated to the desktop environment, and clearly are, otherwise 8 would have had no desktop. The most of the touch-screen oriented UI that you have to interact with is the start menu, and that really isn't even bad. I'd rather them at least support the desktop this way than not at all.

 

Prepar3D works on 8.1 from what I have heard from other users. FSX hasn't worked for anyone as far as I know.

[vernon 0]

Prepar3D works fine in Windows 8.1 would go further and say it is more fluid than before,my opinion only guys

[Jude Bradley 659]

How about the joystick issue, still present?
 

[BilboBaggins 82]

Windows is rapidly becoming a legacy OS. It feels these days much like the Amiga OS did right before that platform died. Increasingly rapid releases of increasingly fluffy updates, with increasing instability and incompatibility.

 

Honestly, Commodore did a better job dealing with all that near their end than MS has.

[RobertVA 0]

While the Windows 8/8.1 Start screen looks different from the Windows 7 start menu I don't agree with all the "hate eight' sentiment.

 

The Windows 8/8.1 start screen still allows users to "pin" their most frequently used apps to the start screen, the most frequently used apps can be moved to the more convenient left side of the screen, has the circled white arrow near the lower left corner to list all programs and allows the entry of  a search with the first keystroke.

 

Using earlier versions of Windows many users left the task bar at the bottom of the screen with the start/logo button at the left end, a few pixels away from the screen corner where the Windows 8 logo link to the start screen hides (even while running new style apps). With the Windows 8.1 desktop the logo no longer hides.

 

While new Windows 8 style apps can't have cascading windows, two new style apps can share the screen in a horizontal tile configuration. Compatible apps written for earlier versions of Windows need to be run on the Windows 8/8.1 desktop where  their windows can be cascaded like they always were. Menus/tool bars for new style apps hide, in a manner similar to the desktop task bar in earlier versions of Windows, which allows the document pane more space.

 

Now with the second update new style apps have a hidden title bar with a "x" close button, a power off icon has been added to the start screen and the task bar is accessible at the bottom of new style apps.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

The Metro UI is the Windows 8 desktop's evil twin. But it's locked away, so it can't bother anyone.

[mgh 89]

Should not wait until it's actually announced rather than believing what's posted on the web?

The OP is out-of-date. This link is dated 30 May 2013. Win 8.1 is already released