George Grimshaw thanks for posting this very informative post. I remember you guys were going to do KMDW but opted out of it because of the performance issue it would cause in the New York area. I wish others had the same commitment to scenery performance as you guys do...-Alex 'AirBadger86' everyone has the right to come in here and post valid concerns about this hobby. FSX hits home with allot of people who were looking forward to moving on to the next level with this new version. One post may not get the point across that people are ######. The passive Microsoft appreciative attitude is fine in the right context but many want this sim fixed. The theoretical 'we'll all join hands and fix this' isn't cutting it with allot of people. Yes it may make 'TDragger' and others feel good but that does nothing in bringing home the point to Aces that many are disatisfied. Alex while you

Alex,35 and the majority of my posts are tech questions or helping others.

Alex FlyTampa has said allot in that statment above, why don't you read it...

** Double Post **

** Double Post **

>Alex FlyTampa has said allot in that statment above, why>don't you read it... I already did read it, thanks.

Well said,It's not designed for a system 3 years down the line.It's designed to work now on an average system and with room to expand in to a future and to allow for a 3 year growth period.

Maybe you need to read it again...

Peter -Thanks for posting this. As a developer of FS9 add-ons, I respect your opinions and perspective!JerryG

Thanks Geroge,Yes, we are working on things right now to get FSX upgraded.meanwhile. ..... Not sure about any patches people are talking about.I don't see what needs to be patched yet.All working very well on my system.I'm very impressed with what FSX can do.Very impressed indeed.

Boshar,You keep complaining about the FPS. What is the FPS on --YOUR-- PC?You posted on other threads (as others who have NOT purchased FSX), but you've not indicated that you've actually used it yet?Look at the thread from the ACES blogs. You'll read, as other havereported here, that FSX will have LOWER FPS compared to FS9 (due to the advantage of taking the Shader 2.0 model capabilities). But,even with lower FPS, FSX is smoother than FS9.Try it first - then tweak - then complain.JerryG

Thanks Dutton and to all posting repsonses here.Yes, that's the right attitude.This is our hobby and what we enjoy.Make no mistake I love flight simulator and I'm very happy to earn money out of it. Like playing golf for money. A dream.I still love flying and FSX does it for me. I haven't used FS9 for weeks now.I'm really excited about what we can do with FSX. Mind blowing actuallyl. Our community is really going to enjoy the online flying aspects to name but a few.At last we'll have somebody to have a drink with at the bar.Some of us will moan and others will be creative and inventive. That comes from speaking to others.Tomorrow for example, I'm meeting up with a guy from a virtual airline that does ATC. We are hooking up with him to develop ATC and our help our community to use FSX to it's best.You see, moaning produces nothing.Who said it. "what if"

I think you meant LGA. MDW did have similar problems but it turned out to be caused by the default jetways at KORD being visible for 40miles or more. I think Martin hacked into their XML code reducing their visible distance & MDW survived joining LGA. The NewYork area remains a no-fly zone unfortunately. I believe the problems are actually caused by a very dense landclass. I could be wrong, it

OK Chris -So, does this mean you'll no longer post any more FSX messages,until, as you say -"For me FSX means a whole new computer and most likely an OS or two"JerryG

Is that a moan?????What if.....