Who's going to use FSX with XP???

[Noel 4,492]

I will run FSX on Win2K Pro as I have every other piece of software made for XP and "unsupported" on Win2K. Unless, of course, they put in the code to prevent it. Despite what people have said here and there, W2K runs everything I have ever tried to install, and with very little issue. If FSX doesn't jive with W2K, I will keep FS9 til Vista comes along, then do the whole upgrade, hardware n OS. I hang on to W2K as it does everything (practically speaking) XP does, and requires no activation . . .Noel

[scott967 62]

Sort of like when I had to go from OS/2 Warp to Win98: HARD. The good thing, is that I got back into flight simming!scott s..

[Guest]

I was responding to flyerboy who already has a fast PC and one of the latest graphics cards. That it will be worthwhile for him to upgrade to Vista/DX10 because of the new features and up to 8 times performance gain. Hope this helps.

[JSkorna 137]

His card is not for DX10, as no cards are right now. I still want to know about all the bad outcomes for the rest of us. Can you list them for us?Hope this helps,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development TeamActive Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter

[W2DR 1,860]

It would, indeed, be an interesting list. I,too, would like to know just how "bad" I'm going to have it running WinXP with "only" DX9.Doug

[Guest]

> His card is not for DX10, as no cards are right now:-hmmm Huh I didn't say it was.> I still want to know about all the bad outcomes for the rest of us. Can you list them for us?1. Your sim will be running up to 8 times SLOWER.2. You won't be seeing the DX10 features (cloud shadows? etc)3. Your sim may crash causing reboots (not possible with Vista/DX10).4. Your sim won't be using the new display driver model.5. Your system will probably not be running 64 bit.6. Your system won't be using the new virtualization features built into Vista.7. Your sim won't be using Shader model 4.0, long shaders, geometry shaders etc.8. You won't have the option to use the Xbox 360 Controller for Windows.9. Your PC will need rebooting everytime you update your display driver.10. Your sim wont be available in the games menu and will take longer to startup.

[JSkorna 137]

1. Wow, so instead of 30FPS I'll get 240FPS? I can hardly wait! Any benchmarks you can point us to?2. So we'll now have cloud shadows? Any screen shots of this?3. My sim doesn't crash now.4. How is this a bad outcome?5. No, and seeing we have already determined that FSX is 32bit, pre- and post-patch, this is a non-factor.6. How is this a bad outcome?7. See #68. I can play XBox if I want to use an XBox controller.9. Once every six weeks or so, big deal.10. I know how to click on an icon. I am sure we will not notice the extra 5 seconds.Hope this helps,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development TeamActive Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter

[Guest JSPuonti]

I have to agree with Jim there on points 2-10 - they aren't really big issues. FSX on XP will no doubt be a big step forward compared to FS9, and the DX10 patch will simply enable certain visual and usability features which relate to Vista. Really big issues would be things like no multiplayer support in XP.As for point 1, I know where you got that information from and as such I can say that you've misunderstood it. In the interview in question, the Microsoft / Aces (can't remember which one it was) representative was talking about the things DirectX 10 will be able to do more efficiently than DX9. What he was saying was that with DX10 code and DX10 hardware, certain tasks CAN be done as much as 8 times faster than in DX9 code and DX9 hardware.The interviewee never once said or suggested that GAMES could run up to 8 times faster simply because you moved from DX9 to DX10. As an example, consider that a car is a game and its engine, transmission and other systems are DX9. You take the DX9 out and replace it with DX10 components.The way you understood the interview, your car now moves 8 times faster, which is wrong. While the car MAY be slightly faster than it was before, the biggest changes take place elsewhere - such as shifting gears. Compared to your old clunker you now shift gears in a blink of an eye, but that doesn't make the car go 8 times faster - it just shifts faster and can thus get up to speed more efficiently. Or maybe the windshield wipers are faster aswell, and can deal with a heavier downpour without breaking a sweat. Both these things can be "up to 8 times faster" than they were on DX9 and they definitely have a positive effect on the driver's experience, but they don't make the car as a whole 8 times faster ;)

[michal 44]

>can be "up to 8 times faster" than they were on DX9 and they>definitely have a positive effect on the driver's experience,>but they don't make the car as a whole 8 times faster ;)Correct. We read here many naive (or "make belief") opinions disseminated about Vista and/or DirectX10. If a small part of a software can run say 5 times faster it absolutely doesn't mean that the whole software will execute as a whole 5 times faster. Anybody who writes complex software understands such basic things.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/for...argo_hauler.gifhttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

[MD83 1]

Yes, I'm going to use XP with FSX. I bought XP 18 months ago ... why should I upgrade so soon?---------------------------------------"If it doesn't have a VC, I won't be flying it http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/DarrenA300/smug.gif" ... hang on a minute .... http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/DarrenA300/unsure.gif ... that is too restrictive! Most flight simulator planes don't have a fully functional VC .... I'm happy to fly non-VC planes such as the brilliant iFDG range, Samdim's fantastic aircraft, POSKY's wonderful planes, and many many others! I'm the richer for it :).[/b]Advice for uploaders: please remove those horrible thumbs.db files - they are useless :)

[Guest]

Erroneous. He wasn't talking about a "small part" of the software, your just making stuff up. Even allowing for marketing BS an increase of 'only' 2-3 times would still be awesome.I'm not sure why you expect nothing much to change when there will be new everything: Hardware, Vista, DirectX, Display driver model & FSX. The next gen Xbox is not even using DX10 technology, it uses DX9L. Your really going to get a big shock.

[W2DR 1,860]

.

[Guest JSPuonti]

I'm sure the truth, as usual, lies somewhere in-between the presented extremes. Be that as it may, you can't really fault anyone for being suspicious whenever "huge leaps in performance" are touted by any hardware / software manufacturer prior to public consumption. These people sell a PRODUCT; it's important for them to make that product appear appealing, even before it's released.The performance increases being touted are usually very specific in scope and tend to be limited to things that the "previous generation" experimented with but failed to realize with sufficient efficiency. Not to mention the fact that game developers are always looking to find ways to push new hardware to its limits. Combine that with users who expect too much of their brand-spanking new hardware, and you got a mix that's sure to eat up any advances made in performance.Just look at the amount of people who have stated they'll upgrade their computer for Vista, FSX and DX10. They'll get the latest and greatest (or, as with most, the closest thing their wallet allows), then crank every setting in FSX to max. Trust me, they'll be in for a surprise if they expect to get "8 times the frames per second" they get now, with current DX9 hardware, FS9 and every setting at max. Even TWICE that seems like daydreaming, when you consider the graphical goodies FSX will offer over FS9. This is why I thought it important to set the poster I personally replied to straight - he had clearly misunderstood the message and was expecting performance that simply will not be there. Michael apparently agreed with my assesment.Anyway, this is just my view on the matter. I seriously doubt I'll be in for a big shock when someone does an XP+DX9+FSX / Vista+DX10+FSX comparison. Time will tell :)

[michal 44]

>Your really going to get a big>shock. It is good to dream. I only hope you do not set yourself up for a big dissapointment.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/for...argo_hauler.gifhttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

[crvm 0]

I will purchase Vista when I can afford to do so which most likely means running FSX on XP. Of course as with all new OP I have not been duped except by that awful ME OP ;-)...............Randy J. Smith................CAUTION! My views represent no one but my own. While I do help companies test products - this in no way means I represent them in ANY fashion.[h4]Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations[/h4]