>that's the point.>it's not a matter of making a choice.>>i can easily compile every sourcecode (which doesn't contain>assembler at least) to a 32bit or 64bit binary - just by>switching a compiler-flag.>>i think they won't do it because they would have to offer>support for another platform which may lead to high costs in>comparison to the effort.You've just mentioned the two chief reasons:1) FS still contains a huge hunk of core code that's pure assembler...2) The costs of maintainng two versions of the same product would be excessive.One additional reason is that - in spite of the seeming ease you've cited - generating efficient and optimized 64-bit code is not simply a matter of flipping a bit switch in the compiler... ;)

This topic has come up before and some of the reasons for not moving to 64-bit have been explained, so I won't go into them here. Bill is correct that it's not as simply as changing a compiler switch--at least for Flight Sim.

just depends on what you want...i didn't say that switching the compiler-flag will boost performance - i just said that switching and shipping via download would (maybe) not be too much work.but it doesn't matter - i will buy it, 64bit or not

>just depends on what you want...>>i didn't say that switching the compiler-flag will boost>performance - i just said that switching and shipping via>download would (maybe) not be too much work.>>but it doesn't matter - i will buy it, 64bit or notIn the other threads that Mike makes reference to, I quoted another developer who's area of expertise is in this area, and his conclusion was that - at this point in time - it is likely that many programs will actually perform better as 32-bit code than as 64-bit code... mainly because of video driver issues. That, of course, doesn't mean the situation won't improve sometime down the road... ;)

Yes Bill, it seems like back when 32-bit came out, for a while, 16-bit apps were still a lot faster for a long time. It took a few years for 32-bit apps to be fast (or, perhaps more accurately it took hardware a few years to handle them).Rhett

why don't they sometimes throw some sugar at the>community by releasing, for example a 64bit version for free>download later. We've already commited to do that for DX10...Cheers,Jason

>We've already commited to do that for DX10...>>Cheers,>>Jasonoh sorry. you are right. i forgot...happy flying ;)

>why don't they sometimes throw some sugar at the>>community by releasing, for example a 64bit version for free>>download later. >>We've already commited to do that for DX10...>>Cheers,>>JasonWe did??? I must have missed that memo...

>>why don't they sometimes throw some sugar at the>>>community by releasing, for example a 64bit version for>free>>>download later. >>>>We've already commited to do that for DX10...>>>>Cheers,>>>>Jason>>We did??? I must have missed that memo...I had *thought* I read it from this guy:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...g_id=1358&page=But after rereading it, you're right. I shouldn't have said "committed." (or comitted). I should have said "hopefully." And "free download" wasn't mentioned either.If I searched I could probably find the quote where I said we never promise stuff in case it doesn't happen and we end up disappointing or enraging. I should take my own advice.:((This is why I'm not in charge of the group...)Cheers,jason

> We did??? I must have missed that memo...You wrote it :-lol

>Because the manager's can't grand every user's>wishlist for the game!>>The dicision's already have been made, and i'm sure they>thought it over before making the choice between 32 and 64>Bit. This is how it's going to be, 32 Bit, nothing more,>nothing less>>Live with it, or step over to an other flightsim program>>[a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe]Apostrophe[/a]

I was referring to his comment on 64-bit. We have committed to anything on that.