Bob,I agree, not a problem to wait and see -- at least until the Vista update is available. I'd be surprised if they bother with a DX9 patch. If the DX9 patch does come, I'll run a file tracker & registry tracker prior to installing the patch so I know exactly what files are modified, added, replaced, etc. etc.Not that I don't trust Microsoft ;) Rob.

Bob,I'm being Kind. But what is wrong with pointing out problems with a product? If a product is defective, don't you want it fixed?If everyone said, FSX is the great where would we be?If someone adds a room to your house and does a terrible job, do you say here's your money and thank you? or do you tell them what you really think?If you don't say something, your rewarding poor quality workman ship -- to me, that is not good.And if the fix is get the DX10 "free" upgrade for Vista only, that is no good either. Sure I get Vista for free, but most people don't. To have them upgrade to Vista to get an FSX patch that "may" resolve the performance problems is a long stretch.Sure we can have fun with FSX, even more fun if it was done better -- no?Not sure what you're getting at Bob but sure sounds like "shutup and go away" just done more politely. You don't need to be sensitive with me so say what you feel -- trust me, I'm not going to be emotionally scared by what you or anyone says about me. I've been a called weirdo and much worse -- doesn't really phase me any and doesn't change the facts about FSX.Rob.

>Bob,>>I'm being Kind. But what is wrong with pointing out problems>with a product? If a product is defective, don't you want it>fixed?Oh brother..............Since when on earth has a "world wide" modern day flight simulator NOT had problems???????????How about FLY, X-Plane, Pro-Pilot????? Problems galore!>>If everyone said, FSX is the great where would we be?Who says it's great, to the extent it can't be improved on? Nobody!The same goes for the above three simulations!>If someone adds a room to your house and does a terrible job,>do you say here's your money and thank you? or do you tell>them what you really think?I've been in the construction business for 35 years. Can you really compare a room addition to a simulator that attempts to simulate so many phases of flight, worldwide topography, airports, navigation systems, seasons, and much much more. IMO, a worthless comparison!What's to compare>If you don't say something, your rewarding poor quality>workman ship -- to me, that is not good.Anyone who's glass is half empty, can come up with many reasons not to like a particular sim, while ignoring others who find a lot to like, but don't expect per perfection, or are stupid enough to expect a world wide sim to be finished! I admit, I get avid X-Plane followers ticked off all the time, with the same half empty arguments! Perhaps I'm no better. But again, this poor workmanship "line" is very weak at best; 'cause there just happens to be a lot of great workmanship included too!>Not sure what you're getting at Bob but sure sounds like>"shutup and go away" just done more politely. You don't need>to be sensitive with me so say what you feel -- trust me, I'm>not going to be emotionally scared by what you or anyone says>about me. I've been a called weirdo and much worse -- doesn't>really phase me any and doesn't change the facts about FSX.You sound like a lawyer who once threatend the creators of FLY, because he figured the sim was incomplete. While so many saw the positive aspects the sim, this particular person could only see the negative. His glass was definately hald empty. I think I did tell him to "shut up and go away" or something close to that. You the same guy? :-hah L.Adamson

I believe the concept is called speaking up -- hence the analogy to adding a room to a house -- the materials are differnt but the concept is the same, you don't "Shutup" if someone you paid money to accomplish does a poor job of it and tells you well if you just close all the windows, the draft coming from the gap between the wall and floor isn't too bad - is it, just live with it. Errrr....No.Ok, so what is your response really about? It isn't really saying anything 1/2 empty, 1/2 full?? Ok sooo, is this going somewhere?X-Plane is really good, at least on my MacPro anyway, it demonstrates multi-core processing code VERY well. Perhaps Microsoft should contact those developers for some assistance since they've admitted they're having threading stability problems.Yes, there is a lot of great workmanship in FSX, some that you and many others are apparently very happy to never be able to see on your PC for at least the next 3 years or so. You find that acceptable?Another analogy you probably will not like... suppose you go buy a Ferrari (with lots of great workmanship) and the dealer tells you that you can't go over 2,000 rpm for 3 years because that's the engine break-in period. What would your response be? You gonna be happy, somewhat maybe for the 1st month or so, at least you can putt around in it, but that first VW bug that blows your doors off cause you can't go over 2,000 rpm, you still gonna be happy? Ok, so maybe you might not be a car guy, but it drives the point home pretty good.In my case, I'm that not too happy guy that is trying to find out why I can't drive my Ferrari over 2,000 rpm for 3 years. Ya gettin' it now?Rob.

This is a known bug with the OS/Task Manager -- not sure if this was fixed in Vista.When stress testing I use a freeware utility called Prime95, it can stress test both cores at the same time. When overclocking my X6800 I used this program a lot to get a stable overclock at 3.9Ghz.Rob.

>>Yes, there is a lot of great workmanship in FSX, some that you>and many others are apparently very happy to never be able to>see on your PC for at least the next 3 years or so. You find>that acceptable?>So, in other words, I'll ignore the fact, that the feel of flight has been raised quite a number of notches, on my computer NOW. I'll also ignore that fact, that so much of the terrain look around my area of mountain/city flight is highly improved over FS9, on my computer NOW. It's what I'm seeing NOW, that's most important, and not what's three years down the line. As I said before, I can tear apart any sim, by constantly dwelling on the negatives. They ALL have many, many negatives, if that's what we're most interested in.FWIW, since you obviously ignore the moving air mass flight characteristics of FSX, then I will make the assumption that your piloting experience is bascially from the computer chair. It's a new and great piece of workmanship built in FSX. But you seem to ignore it totally, as though it doesn't exist. L.Adamson

Rob, First thing is that I like many other folks can't always have the machine of our dreams because of the usually exorbitant prices no matter if you get it off the shelf or build it with the newest hardware. I was never able to run FS9 to its fullest until I got a new machine which due to $$$ will be with me for a while. I had the demo version of FSX which I did'nt think was representative of the full version. I also had the 2nd Beta which I think comes pretty close to FSX out of the box. Because of this I knew from the start that I wouldn't get close to its full potential but nevertheless am happy I made the purchase.

Rob, First thing is that I like many other folks can't always have the machine of our dreams because of the usually exorbitant prices no matter if you get it off the shelf or build it with the newest hardware. I was never able to run FS9 to its fullest until I got a new machine which due to $$$ will be with me for a while. I had the demo version of FSX which I did'nt think was representative of the full version. I also had the 2nd Beta which I think comes pretty close to FSX out of the box. Because of this I knew from the start that I wouldn't get close to its full potential but nevertheless am happy I made the purchase. Here is what my settings are: I run the following settings for the big iron and as with most usersthe only place I get what most call low framerates is at some of thelarge airports.At Seattle sitting on Rwy 34R the lowest I get is 14-15 and as soon asairborne it jumps close to the target framerate.(25)I doubt that any pilot flying big iron is spending much time looking attrees and houses. Hopefully they have there eyes on the instruments or eyes dead ahead to keep the pointy end going in the right direction. The settings are as follows:Target Framerate 251280x1024x32Antistropic checkedAA checkedBoth program controlledGlobal Texture HighAdvanced AnimationsTest single lineHigh Res CockpitAircraft Casts ShadowsAircraft landing lightsLevel of Detail Radius-midrangeMesh Complexity 100Mesh Resolution 10mTexture Resolution 1mWater Effects 1xScenery Complexity DenseAutogen noneSpecial Effects HighAirline Density 40General Aviation 23Airport Vehicle MediumRoad,Ship,Leisure-0Detailed Clouds MediumCloud Draw 60milesWeather Changes MediumThis is on the following machine.AMD64 3500 VeniceEvga 7900 GT KO 256mb2mb Corsair PC 3200 DDR 400ASUS A8N Deluxe SLI MoboCreative SB Augigy 2Track IR3 w/vectorFS Genesis Terrain Mesh Mexico, Canada, USAI have also used many of the tweaks readily found here in the Forum.If I decide to Bush Fly low and slow I crank the water effects allthe way up and add autogen to the 3rd setting.Perhaps it's because I tried Beta2 that I'm not complaining loudly.Of course I'd like more but as I said I pretty much knew what I wouldbe getting out of the box.Of course I'd like a patch especially for the big city scenery andautogen as well even though I am able to crank it to 3/4 for bushflying.I'll take anything MS sends our way to make it better.Regards,Craig

>>I doubt that any pilot flying big iron is spending much time>looking at>trees and houses. Hopefully they have there eyes on the>instruments or eyes dead ahead to keep the pointy end going in>the right direction. >Speaking of tree's and houses, I actually enjoy them from a wing view, such as the default FSX Airbus. Of course, I really prefer these new FSX photo-real "house tops" rather than cartoon looking houses placed on top of these photo-real tiles. These photo real tiles look very authentic when climbing or decending over them, after takeoff or while landing. Subdivison auto-gen was never a strong point of FS9, and the same goes for FSX. Amazing what subdivsion auto-gen "off" can look like! :7My window view flight is done using shift Z for airspeed, heading, and altitude. I fly a lot in spot view too, as well as tower views some. I flew a lot of R/C which helps greatly for these non-cockpit modes. L.Adamson

Ok Rob...plain speak.Seperate your problems with the sim from your view of other people on this website.Said another way, stop viewing people poorly who don't share your mission.Now a fact...you've not been a terrible offender, although you have headed that direction a few times. Others have been awful in this regards.So...plain enough? If not, one more time....Your feelings about the sim, and the sim performance itself, is no reason to be rude to others here, no matter how they view the sim, no matter how much they enjoy the sim.Was that plain?Bob

>Your feelings about the sim, and the sim performance itself,>is no reason to be rude to others here, no matter how they>view the sim, no matter how much they enjoy the sim.>Rob does have this special talent. Kind of like speaking to me, as though I'm a red-neck hick, and just bought FSX along with a six pac at Walmart to "play fly" with a keyboard.:-lol And there is this constant hoopla extolling the virtues of FS9 over FSX; and then I'm thinking...........heck, I had numerous versions of FS9 before most others. I beta tested the "dang thing"(hick-lingo), with and without it's bridges!I mean,... jee whiz................since I'm already "very" aware of all the greatness of FS9 and all it's glorious addons; is it beyond comprehension, that a normal mind, such as mine, just might notice that some excellent features actually happen to be included with FSX; with out being looked at, as though you're Joe six pac, the keyboard flyer, or something? Or being told time after time, that the sim is just "unusable", and all the reasons why?And as I'm being told this, I'm again thinking..........Wow, I just completed one of these FSX flights, that gave an immense sensation of the real thing! I'm impressed as ####! And yet, I'm very aware, having a sound mind, that FS9 or X-Plane is going to do a better job in a different situation. What I DO know is this. FSX is indeed impressive in numerous instances of replicating flight, and in some areas, does a very impressive job of it, over FS9. If it didn't, I'd simply ignore FSX. But good golly (more hick), I just seem to enjoy FSX...L,Adamson

If you think I'm preaching, then what exactly are you doing Bob? Anyway, your diverting from the issue I was presenting since I'm the one that started this thread and provided data/screenshots. I was going to provide more screenshots tonight for day images, but to be honest, I've lost the motivation.If there isn't a problem with FSX, then great, hope you folks continue on in bliss and praise Microsoft at every opportunity because it's the polite and kind thing to do.Best of luck to you, no more post from me - mission accomplished.Rob.

The robains Vs the FTD1949 Forum...Stelios

This thread is now going down hill. Somebody insulted us rednecks. Now back to keyboard flying and my 6 pack I think I will steal that Mr. Adamson.:-)LOL it must be hard for some people to grasp that FSX seems to run on some computers nicely. Even worse some of us are having fun with it. Oh No have we no shame. Hide the sheep and pigs grandpas loose and needs a copilot I feel an FSX need comming on.:-badteeth