I'm not trying to be a troll, but I read an interesting article from WinXP News. They didn't talk about Flight Simulation, but the article does mention the following:"As consumers, we all want to pay less and get more. Microsoft seems to be trying to give us just that, as they incorporate more and more of what used to be "add on" software into the operating system and offer low cost services that provide others. ...But is there a downside to getting all your protective programs from the same source that makes the OS? Proponents of Microsoft's model say no, that having it all made by MS means everything integrates more fully, ensures better compatibility and saves people money. Others aren't so sure."Looking at the FS X screenshots, they seem to have improved the scenery quite a bit.Now here's my question to everyone, especially developers (freeware and payware/shareware):With the improvements that Microsoft seems to incorporate into the FS Series, do you think there will come a time when the improvements will prevent people from buying/downloading add-on products?

Not really. Improvements are only improvements until they become the de facto standard, requiring further improvement. MS cannot move with the pace and focus required in the sim market, nor should they be expected to. Their job - and the way they see it I'm sure - is to provide the platform on which everyone else can build. If they build a better platform it just provides a better starting point for the next improvements.Which is after all why the market exists in the first place, and why MS can continue selling a package three years after its release! Allcott

The FS series has always been pushing the boundaries of technology. Flying requires a massive amount of data and there won't be any simulator in my lifetime that will be "as real as it gets". However, we are getting close. Developers, who are usually aviation enthousiasts, like me, will always find new things to simulate and to push the boundaries between releases ven further. More realistic aircraft, better weather generation, improved scenery, ATC, adventures - you name it.I have about a dozen payware aircraft, countless scenery add-ons, adventures, ATC, weather generators, etc... and, sure, it would be nice to have them all incorporated into one nice package at some time. I think FSX will eliminate the need for some add-ons, but surely not all of them.Pat

>The FS series has always been pushing the boundaries of>technology. Flying requires a massive amount of data and there>won't be any simulator in my lifetime that will be "as real as>it gets".Unless you are 80 years old, I don't agree with that part. ;)I think we will have a sim so fully developed and so well rendered within the next ten years many will not be able to tell the difference. The tech is here to support it. 2 core CPU's are already common, with 4 and 8 core cpu a built-in capability of AMDs tech. Storage costs are so cheap its almost trivial, and highspeed networking makes remote access in the form of distributed computing a reality. Today.I do agree wit the rest you say though.The sophistocation of the tech translates to both parts of the computing experience, input and output. The tools we use to create content will match the sophistocation of the rendered output and will be as accessible as they are today, perhaps even more so. Take the automobile as an example. Even the cheapest car of today is vastly more sophistocated than one from 10 years ago and the "standard feature list" on most new cars is extensive and complete. Yet, if you take a look at the aftermarket industry for the car, you will see it is thriving.So no, nether FSX nor Vista will slow the market for third party addons. Thay may change it some, and some companies may need to addapt, but where one oportunity may close a couple of others are sure to open.CheersShad

To the OP:The answer is a big no for the simple reason that, out of the box, MSFS is and always has been geared toward casual users.If Microsoft brought FS (in terms of aircraft) to the level of detail of the PMDG 747 or Level D 767 -and they could do this if they wanted- they'd loose a lot of customers and their support costs would go through the roof trying to dealing with Joe Sixpack who can't align the IRUs because he refuses to read a 200 page manual.So MS will never go the hard-core route, which is why we have 3rd party developers (such as myself) who cater to that 1 percent market share who really want as technically accurate a flightsim as possible within the limitations of a home computer.It's unfortunate, but the market for dry, technical simulations isn't very big.I fully expect within the next 10 years to see massive improvements in the scenery department, because that's where the sales are, but that's it.-Bryan

I ceratinly wouldn't bet against computing power... How long before we see a 32 or a 128 core home PC? :) Danny

We will all be using paper thin screens, stretched panoramically around our seats.If you don't believe me, this has already been developed in Japan.One use could be interactive electronic books along side new versions of monitors.I think the multiplayer aspect will kick off on a larger scale as Broaband speeds increase.

I think it will constantly test what ever hardware is currently available.