FSX was designed for Vista not XP...

[Guest Water Mango]

Who's willing to dispute this now that's it's officially in the FSX readme file??? I don't know why Aces was less than truthful about this during development...

[Guest davewins]

>Who's willing to dispute this now that's it's officially in>the FSX readme file??? I don't know why Aces was less than>truthful about this during development...I said this before and people on here want to argue that it's just marketing strategy or some hogwash. It's clear as day that this was designed for future hardware/SOFTWARE and flight simulator does happen to be the staple game for windows so it makes sense that the last game by windows before vista is released is designed for vista/dx10. I think we need to be patient and really wait this out and see what vista/dx10 has to offer. I think we are going to be amazed well at least I hope.

[Guest Water Mango]

Problem is Dave me and many others got attacked on these forums when we brought this fact up. I remember reading along time ago before Vista got pushed back that FSX was a Vista title. Now I see it's all silent now this fact has been confirmed. I tried my best to go back and find the article I read concerning FSX. What troubles me is 'TDragger' was one of the ones in here stating FSX was designed for XP/DX9. Are these the kind of half truths we can expect to deal with from our new improved relationship with Microsoft/Aces???

[slashed2 53]

I recall the whole vista/FSX thing too, but I'm not sure if there was any statement about design. I do remember the words optimized if that makes a difference.As far as half-truths, who knows, maybe miscommunication between the project manager and the software developers on how to categorize it. There have been several instances where Aces members would contradict anothers statements, but with a large project that can happen I assume.Not sure about the whole attack thing but now I understand where you are coming from. There seems to be many attacks nowadays in the forums.Ian.

[n4gix 4,947]

Yes, I'm quite sure the marketing department knows far more than the folks who wrote the bloody code... :-roll

[Guest Water Mango]

Bill you were one of the main ones on the FSX/XP/DX9 bandwagon... You were actually a beta tester as well and currently work with Eaglesoft. You knew what was going on... The excuse the marketing department didn't know what the coders were doing is bogus when you had the sim in hand and could see what was going on... You don't need to be in with the programmers to tell that FSX was going to be a dog on most computers (especially the so called target market). I think you guys at ES better get off the FSX caracal and keep developing for FS9 for the foreseeable future. If you try to put anything out for FSX that uses just 1fps more than the default, your effort is toast. I think we all got screwed on this one as hardware developers are not upgrading processors, their more so doubling them up in Dual Core format. FSX doesn't really support that. Vista may not be the

[W2DR 1,859]

Me, for one. If you were an MS marketing guru and you had a product that didn't perform very well with WinXP/DX9 what would you say? Never mind that the development team says it was designed with WinXP and DX9 (not surprising since Vista and DX10 didn't exist when the sim was developed). Either this is pure CYA marketing spin or the development team has been telling less than the truth. I believe it's the former.Doug

[mganz121 159]

>What troubles me is 'TDragger' was one>of the ones in here stating FSX was designed for XP/DX9. Are>these the kind of half truths we can expect to deal with from>our new improved relationship with Microsoft/Aces??? Maybe Tdragger of Aces has been a little more honest than some may be prepared to accept in their never ending quest and anxiety for a fluid sim with decent frames and all sliders to the right. This article reads:-VISTA gaming will be 10 to 15 per cent slower than XP .MICROSOFT is telling its selected gaming industry chaps that gaming under Vista will be ten to fifteen per cent slower than XP....More:-http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34915Personally I am going to sit on the fence with this release for about 12 months and see what happens. Besides, by that time my 3rd party addons may be patched for FSX and I will simply jump onto the forums and do a little research on how to tweak without feeling a little disappointed for the first 12 months of the game life. It is time for this fella to break the upgrade cycle.

[FTD1949 0]

I'll happily dispute it with no knowledge of the facts. Isn't that what we do here?:)Craig

[altstiff 71]

The fact for me is I get 14FPS at CYYZ on medium settings with the default aircraft.

[W2DR 1,859]

Not always :-) .

[RFields5421 1]

Gauges need to be registered for a feeWhere on earth did you get this idea?.DLL files, yes, gauges properly built to SDK standards - no.But anyone who has paid the slightest attention to computer security over the past few years knew it was coming.As far as hype, yes FSX was designed for Vista - and for Vista SP2 - and for the OS to follow Vista. Like all good computer programs it was designed to take advantage of technology which is expected in the near future.But it was also designed to RUN WELL ON WINDOWS XP SP2It was built on XP and tested on XP.You seem to imply that it was not designed to work on XP - which is pure fiction.

[Guest Babubhai]

I saw a video of a game called Crysis (One of the best looking FPS games yet). That was running quite choppy, that is because according to the developers it is still running on DirectX 9, DirectX 10 will improve performance alot.And yes I know DirectX 10 is not available yet to develop on. Same case for that game it is being developed using DirectX 9, but like I said according to its developers, Direct X 10 will be the optimal platform for it.

[Guest RGH]

>Gauges need to be registered for a fee>>Where on earth did you get this idea?>>.DLL files, yes, gauges properly built to SDK standards - no.>>But anyone who has paid the slightest attention to computer>security over the past few years knew it was coming.>>As far as hype, yes FSX was designed for Vista - and for Vista>SP2 - and for the OS to follow Vista. Like all good computer>programs it was designed to take advantage of technology which>is expected in the near future.>>But it was also designed to RUN WELL ON WINDOWS XP SP2>>It was built on XP and tested on XP.>>You seem to imply that it was not designed to work on XP ->which is pure fiction.What you have just said is what I have been reading for the last six months or more, That FSX will run well on Vista,but it will also run well with XP.Regards.Rex.

[Guest Babubhai]

Yeh, this is a misconception too...FSX has been designed to run on Windows XP and DirectX 9. Thats why it is released for it.But DirectX 10 will be the better platform for it run. With the right hardware as well ofcourse.