>>>>> MS has been working on a new version of flight simulator>>for>>>a while now. We all know this to be fact, we have even seen>>>screenshots of wet runways and reflections of water etc. >>>>Which were explicitly stated not to be shots from a>new>>version of FS, merely what it is known to be possible. FSX>may>>well show up in February, but I'm tired of hearing those wet>>runway shots referred to like they were from a new version>of>>FS when as far as we know they aren't (no offense). >>>> That's not the point, the point is that MS clearly wanted to>show us something and that something was wet runways and>reflections in the water. Who cares if it was not actual>screenies from in the game? The fact was they were working on>the newest version and wanted to "tease" us with new>technology in the game. Maybe you should look past those>screenshots to what they were trying to tell us eh?Sorry, I've just seen too many ignorant people cite those screens as being actual confirmed shots from a new version of FS.

Paul, Beta testers report issues, but the software vendor determines which are critical "show stoppers" and which are put aside or on the back burner. They don't have to pay the testers any heed if they don't wish to, do they? -JohnEdit: And for those who don't get the 800x600 reference, I run FS2004 on a P3/800, GeF 4200 TI rig. I found out long ago that acceptable fps=800x600x32. "Some" maintain you can't enjoy the sim at this res. The Noive! :)

With the "anouncement" of MSFS X, I hope this christmas wish isn't too late, but I would like to see Microsoft cut a deal with Google Earth. VFR flying would take on a whole new simming experience. :-cool

>> I do however love reading the nay sayers comments.Honestly, thats all i wanted to read. Im scared to read more.. LOL.Guys, ive only read his post, and i dont know if i want to read any more responses to my comment. I was trying to start a bucket of crap, but i also have faith. Yes, even in bill gates (as strange as it might seem). I wasnt trying to get attacked, but i think we should all just wait and see how big of an improvement we get before we all start the same ol' same ol'.Honesly, im worried this thread, if not allready, is about to turn into a war. Wouldnt bother me if it was locked.Now, im going to go read the responses to my comment and see if i ###### anyone off. :-hahTake care guys! :-wave

hmmm... I wasnt in for it after all! :-lol :-hah :-kewl

Amusing how folks get upset over an offer of a new OS "Vista" and a new "MSFS":-)I see no requirement that anyone purchase Vista or the next version of MSFS. Don't mean this in a negative way, just looking at the "other side of the coin" so to speak.We have a perfectly usable OS [Win XP and a perfectly usable MSFS[FS9]. If MS dropped the entire FS series, we would still be able to enjoy flight simulation. A few us who go as far back as FS98 or previous versions can only marvel at what we have with FS9:-) Who doesn't remember the transition from Win 3.1 to Win95:-)I'm personally liking what I hear about Vista and hope it lives up to some of the things that are being said about it. As to the article mentioned here, how can we all know if the article is correct, or if they may simply be after an "exclusive". Seems to be the trend nowdays.... Meanwhile, happy simming:-)

>Well, sorry to say but if this is what FS10 is going to>offer..they can keep it and I cannot believe nobody has>mentioned this yet but... The article says FS10 is designed>for taking the full effect of the gaming enhancements of the>new MS operating system, Vista. Super, so us users not only>got to buy FS10 for 55 dollars (roughly) but then we get to>all reformat our computers to get rid of WinXP and load up>Vista. I imagine getting a copy of Vista will set one back 200>dollars at least. So now to get the full effect (per the>article) We have to spend 250-275 dollars plus reformat! And>all this so I can have animals running around, nice rivets on>planes, shader and lighting enhancments and ground AI??? I>will give credit to MS though. They design FS10 to be>optimized for Vista thereby getting everyone to dump XP and>purchase Vista because when people start screaming that they>cannot get FS10 to work right or FR's are crappy, the first>question from MS will be...Do you have Vista installed? If>not, you need to. Forget it!!!This is so ridiculous that people are assuming they know everything about the new sim and OS from a 100 word blurb in a mainstream gaming magazine. Give it a freaking rest!No past upgrade version of Windows has been over $90 and I don't expect Vista to change this - they want to sell it to a lot of people, not cause everyone to pass on it because of a high price.

We can all debate the intergrity of the article, but I'll personally be taking it with a grain of salt, until such time as Microsoft annouce something on their website(s) or issues a press release.

"As Randy Smith said, PC Gamer has to have the info correctly....in fact, the article even mention it in a splash graphic that this is a first exclusive......PC Gamer just doesn't publish bogus info or release dates. So as a betting man, I'd wager that this info is correct and we'll all be hearing big stuff very soon."This is the real deal. FS9 is looking obsolete in 2005, and it's time for a change http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/Dar...humbsupblag.gifAI Fuel Trucks, cars on the roads, animals, a NEW Weather Engine (the most important part), and a new graphics engine ... perfect :)

>Has anybody else noticed that some payware folks that may have>beta access seem to be pushing products out the door recently?They know that FS9 is about to be succeeded ... thankfully!February can't come quick enough!

The beta testing for FSX has been reported to have been in full swing for quite some time and it is a pretty good indicator that we are not hearing a lot of developers posting to this thread, because the announcement might not be such a big surprise to them.Also, I don't think it is coincidence that the MSFS team blogged that they'd be going to the CES for the first time in the first week on January, plus the reputation of PC Games who will certainly not publish a world-exclusive announcement without any involvement by MS.I'd suspect that we'll see an official announcement in the first week or January.Pat

>AI Fuel Trucks, cars on the roads, animals, a NEW Weather>Engine (the most important part), and a new graphics engine>... perfect :)almost perfect, the ATC needs improvement, too. local accents in different countries, and decent traffic separation (no more aircraft flying into me on short final and no more silly go arounds)!!!regards,

If they were planning on releasing it after Christmas anyway, they would not want to say anything about it ahead of time so as to get as many sales of FS2004 for Christmas. Otherwise, if it was ready, they would have released it in November for the Christmas sales run. I also don't see a well-known magazine like PCGamer putting out a false article. Even if the release date wasn't February, they surely wouldn't make a claim of FS X coming out in 2006 if Microsoft hasn't been working on it. PCGamer's street cred would drop in the gutter, at least for the flight simmers out there. And what is up with the complaining already? LOL You are complaining about ether at this point. iMiller

Guys,Some of you have MSDN subscriptions, I'm sure, so you already know about Vista (old name: Longhorn). It's been in beta for quite some time now. It does seem like Vista will be much better.All of this new stuff is what makes stuff fun. I for one am ready for a freshening up a bit. Anything that can make things better, I'm game.I need a new system anyways...LOL.On the other hand for those that don't want to change I think you'll be good to go as well.

Backwards compatibility has been publicly acknowledged in the blogs if I remember right.