By the>way, the feeling of flight in the new version is just way>ahead fs9. I wonder what they cooked up in the airfile to do>this.I haven't noticed a whole lot different about the air files, or flight parameters, etc. I think a lotof it is due to the new "inside motion" effect they have now. IE: when you firewall it, you "see" yourselfbeing pushed back against the seat. If the air filesare different, I haven't noticed it too much. They allseem to fly basically the same as FS9 to me. Or at leastas far as the Cessna, Baron, etc..MK

Yeah, a lot of people don't seem to understand that games have to be programmed for DX10 - you don't just get Vista w/ DX10 and suddenly get some huge performance/image quality boost in old games. If I run a DX7 game right now on my DX9 WinXP/video card, I'm still running a DX7 game, it doesn't get "DX9'ed" or something just by virtue of the a later version being there...

Vista uses a new graphics driver model, and a different design for the DX system. Among other things, most of the code now runs in user mode vice in the kernal. This is probably more of a reliability (BSD) thing, rather than FPS. But the entire driver design is different, even when the DX9 API is being used, and the device driver interface (DDI) is 9EX (this is what DxDiag calls it).Hence, performance differences between Vista and Win XP are possible, even when FSX is using the DX9 API.Vista went gold a couple days ago, so folks with the highest level credentials should get the "official" version next week. But even with the last public release (candidate) version 5744, there isn't much different (other than MS are bragging about the new system sounds in the RTM version if that sort of thing flicks your bic).scott s..

> By the>>way, the feeling of flight in the new version is just way>>ahead fs9. I wonder what they cooked up in the airfile to do>>this.>>I haven't noticed a whole lot different about the >air files, or flight parameters, etc. I think a lot>of it is due to the new "inside motion" effect they >have now. IE: when you firewall it, you "see" yourself>being pushed back against the seat. If the air files>are different, I haven't noticed it too much. They all>seem to fly basically the same as FS9 to me. Or at least>as far as the Cessna, Baron, etc..>MKIf you go into the FSX.CFG file and change all the head movement parameters to 0.0 the aircraft fly just about the same as FS9 for the GA aircraft anyway.

Running Vista improves nothing. FSX is not programmed for DX10. It is using shader 2.0 and DX10 allows shader 4.0. When you run FSX under Vista that is all you are doing...running FSX under Vista. FSX is not built specifically for Vista, was not built for DX10 and does not natively include any Shader 4.0 data. The 'patch' that many are salivating for is actually a code rewrite which is going to be: a. large and b. a long time from now. Vista, DX10 and DX10 cards will be on the market LOOOOOOONG before FSX becomes DX10 compatible.

>> By the>>>way, the feeling of flight in the new version is just way>>>ahead fs9. I wonder what they cooked up in the airfile to>do>>>this.>>>>I haven't noticed a whole lot different about the >>air files, or flight parameters, etc. I think a lot>>of it is due to the new "inside motion" effect they >>have now. IE: when you firewall it, you "see" yourself>If you go into the FSX.CFG file and change all the head>movement parameters to 0.0 the aircraft fly just about the>same as FS9 for the GA aircraft anyway.Hehe looks, like there is another person who didn't fall for this easy trick with head bob. That makes two of us ;).

I just gotta shake my head and laugh every time someone falls for MS's Vista hype.