I doubt MS will EVER have an Airbeese in FS as a default aircraft. Boeing is a local company in Washington and it impacts the American audience, though I would love an A320!

As sad as it is - the truth is we are definitely not the target audience of FS10 (I'll still bet that's what the internal version number and registry calls the program)Microsoft KNOWS most of us are going to buy it as soon as possible. But for every person registered on this forum - Microsoft needs to sell many more copies of the program.The audience which holds the future of Flight Simulator in it's hands is 15-25 year old males who want fast, quick, easy to learn - and get bored next month - games.One of my pilot friends said recently that we all need to be looking at moving to X-Plane. Because "You know some day Microsoft is going to decide it can't sell a half-million copies of FS when a new version is released - and will end the program". Scary but probably true.Despite our love of FS, or it's "prestige" value - the decision to keep supporting several hundred thousand dollars a year of development costs has to come down to how many can they sell.Where's the timeframe for proper testing before release (unless the information they've been getting from machines like mine is good enough)...A couple points - first where was that level of testing for FS2004?I've seen plenty of posts from people who were supposedly beta testers - and most don't even know the GPS is able to display and use real world approach procedures. Many scenery designers - who were supposedly beta testers - don't even know now how to set an elevation so the AI and user aircraft correctly use the airport.Beta testing is to see if the program breaks - and that it breaks with your favorite addon is NOT Microsoft's fault.Beta testing is not feature development time. That was internal Alpha testing. The most common thing which happens to features in Beta testing is they get pulled out.Another thing is that Microsoft came out publicly and hired several experienced developers with Flight Simulator backgrounds last spring - could they have been an internal beta team?I have no idea - we will wait and see.

Well boys and girls, that is about as legit as it gets.It's funny how people think it's impossible to be released in Feb. Well...believe it. We've all been hoodwinked! All it shows me is that their NDA worked very, very well.edit- Guess it's possible that PC gamer made a mistake with the release date, but not likely since it's so soon.Has anybody else noticed that some payware folks that may have beta access seem to be pushing products out the door recently? The one that stands out in my mind should still be in beta itself. Perhaps developers know that when FS10 is announced, we'd be alot less likely to buy a product for FS9?10 bucks says now we'll start seeing more information now. Maybe MS allowed PC gamer to be the first

I don't see why they wouldn't include an Airbus, other than for copyright reasons. If I recall correctly, Boeing moved their headquarters to Wichita, and scaled back their Washington-based operations. This cause a lot of anti-Boeing sentiment in the Seattle area. So I doubt that kissing up to Boeing would be why MS wouldn't include a Airbus.

just my two cents but i think that they start working on the next version shortly after the latest version is released so they have been working on this around 18 months with a full team I am sure its been beta testing for awhile now.shane

"Another thing is that Microsoft came out publicly and hired several experienced developers with Flight Simulator backgrounds last spring - could they have been an internal beta team?"Reggie, that's what I would believe as it's one way to keep a product under wraps. I only read the scan of the PC World article, but this doesn't sound like a major rewrite of MSFS. Also, the article doesn't sound like it's written by the type of person who frequents these forums. I think very few here would go ga-ga over AI ground traffic or herds of animals crossing the plains.If this is indeed the FS that's being released, I don't believe it's the FS that users here have been waiting for or offering suggestions for. It certainly doesn't sound like it--it sounds more heavily eye candy oriented and as others state, we aren't the target market.I do think you owe the FS2004 beta testers (I was one) more respect. Betas are a cross section of the community, each offering his or her own area of expertise. No one person knows it all and I don't feel it fair to hit on the weaknesses of a few to 'diss an entire beta process. No one has to know the points you cited, as long as the beta community as a whole represents the world the product will be released in.I still am bound by the FS2004 beta NDA, but what I can say is common sense--products like FS2004 require testing by the "civilian" community because those outside the projects can dream up scenarios those inside cannot--and that requires some who are ignorant of how "real" gps functions or how AI scnery is built. Heck, I am a scenery designer and undoubtedly some of the scenery you use came forth from one of my products, Landclass Assistant. But knowing how to build landclass doesn't make me an expert on all elements of scenery design, does it?Hat's off to FS2006's testers (I wasn't asked nor could I test FS2006--I haven't upgraded my system or O/S in years) if they've remained this faithful to an NDA.-John

Boeing's HQ was moved to Chicago - they do have a major production base in Wichita.

Im still waiting for games that were going to be released last summer. Last years summer! Ive learned until its on the shelves, its nothing but rumor.And yes, I suspect paywares are going to be rushed out as quickly as possible and anyone that even has an idea, its going to hurry up and try to cash in.As is though, Im pretty content with FS9 and have a small fortune invested. I do not suspect anything ground breaking or any graphic advancements even close to todays cutting edge games. Yes I will buy it but fs9 is going to be on my hardrive for a long time.

>>I do think you owe the FS2004 beta testers (I was one) more>respect. I agree......Besides, I know a heck of a lot about real world aviation GPS's! :( If I had my way, everyone would have one! :D L.Adamson --- FS2004 beta tester

>I don't see why they wouldn't include an Airbus, other than>for copyright reasons. If I recall correctly, Boeing moved>their headquarters to Wichita, and scaled back their>Washington-based operations. This cause a lot of anti-Boeing>sentiment in the Seattle area. So I doubt that kissing up to>Boeing would be why MS wouldn't include a Airbus. Just to clarify, the 787 will be assembled in Washington, along with revamped versions of the 737 (using composite materials based on 787 tech) in 5 years or so, so Boeing's presence in the state is getting a boost.Having said that, Microsoft isn't in the business of boosting Boeing, and I for one am glad to see the possibility of a default Airbus. Chances are, it won't be as feature-rich as a 3rd party addon, but it may provide a foundation from which to build a more accurate Airbus systems simulation. I expect good things following the release of FSX

What really interests me is the support for the Vista operating system. Will FS 10 be a showcase product for Vista? What does that get us, 64-bit execution and support for dual processors? This could turn out to be a unusually "high performance" version of MS flight simulator using equipment that's out today (e.g., recent vintage graphics card, plenty of main memory, dual core, 64-bit processors).

Well, Here's what I think:;-) The MS marketing department is repsonsible for marketing ALL of MS products. I'm sure they set a pre-marketing strategy further out then 2 months, so you tell me if you really think it will be out in FEB...ROFL.I also think the MS marketing department is not bound by the development cycle of the FS team to a certain point. What I think you might be seeing is corporate MS marketing nothing else.As far as developers pushing products out the door before the release of FSX. What a joke. We're not that well financed...lol. We don't have nearly the resources to acomplish such a task. It's more like most developers have the same problems as everyone else, source material, people going on vacation, real world jobs, computer breakdowns, data loss, shall I go on?The bottom line is, it's really fun to speculate, but don't read too much into it folks. It's going to be a fun ride, a really fun ride, that you can be sure of.

So many people have been posting responses such as "oh well, the weather engine hasn't been greatly improved, the physics engine hasn't either, just the eye candy.HOW THE #### DO YOU KNOW THIS??? CAN I PLEASE HAVE A LINK TO YOUR SOURCE???Please reserve that kind of judgement until an actual in-depth review is released, not just a quick exclusive from a mag.I for one am holding out hope that it will be a great improvement. In fact I have little doubt that it will be, considering how good an improvement FS2002 and FS2004 were over previous versions.James

im with you james. People to to sit there and just chill and not jump to conclusions. We dont know what to expect. How big of an improvement was made from FS2002 to FS2004? A big one IMHO. Guys, seriously, lets wait a few more months before we all let loose and start giving out opinions on a product that isnt out. ;)Hope everyone had a good christmas. :-wave

You've got to be kidding.Why should we be the first to know?We are, who knows, 1% of the customer base.The money is where the visibility is at. PC Gamer depends on its exclusives to survive, and MS depends on getting the word out to the most people quickly. One article in PC Gamer must garner 10-100 times the visibility they would get here. They all wash each other's hands for business' sake.I would appreciate some information, but I certainly wouldn't take it personally that they didn't approach "me" first. We'll find out in due time. I'm certainly not going to hold my breath. I'm happy with what I've got.