OK -my take on FSX, for what it's worth....We are seeing a divided community here, for a number of reasons. I'm in the middle - got some significant issues with FSX, but also got a lot of positives out of it.Plus points: Superb look and feel - flight dynamics are first class in FSX.Improved ATC - not as much as I'd like, but multi-runway operation is a big improvement, and I don't seem to get as many vectors for the "sake of it". Ground and water textures are fantastic - a real "wow factor".Weather engine significantly improved,Seems to feel smoother at 18FPS than FS2004 at 20FPS, but this is a very marginal plus.FSX is vastly improved from FS9 all-round - it's not just an upgrade (like FS9 really justcorrected problems with FS 2002 weather, and aircraft) - FSX is a massive change to FS9This simulator is on sale for less than

> You guys need to read my ENTIRE post, > I love the comment about "jihad" very good :), take a look in>the mirror!You "need to (re)read my ENTIRE post"...In the first sentence I said, "...cuts both ways..."In the last sentence I said, "...from both camps..."Did I stutter somewhere? I think it's pretty clear that - being more of a centrist myself - I'm equally tired of both extremes! :-bang :-beerchug

Indeed. They must first deal with XP and DX9. Like you, if they try to bundle a performance patch in with a DX10 implementation I'm done with MSFS forever. For a variety of reasons (all much more important than FSX) I'm not going to even consider a move to Vista until 2008. If I have to live with FSX in it's current state on XP until then I'll simply uninstall it and move on.Doug

Hornit's in the "armchair" category?

If you folks think Microsoft cares about us hardcore simmers, you guys need to think again.Microsoft was not making any money on add-ons, only how many copies they can sell and make the game friendly to all users.we hardcore simmers are the one,s that kept FS9 going strong.all we did was want better planes that were more acurate.Microsoft had nothing to do with that.they just got nervous when they saw just how big the hardcore simmer community was getting and they wanted to get apiece of the action.I cannot use FSX right now because of performance on add-ons if and when they come out.there is no way im going to use default planes when there are super great planes out there to add-on.oh and who said microsoft was a leader in the Airplane industry.just because they got a sim out does not mean they are experts.the add-on group of people are in some cases real airline pilots that want and know how a plane should fly.Microsoft is just trying to sell there sim.Microsoft can do what they want because they have no competition.Microsoft did what they did with FSX to increase sells in the future.I was at the Avsim conferance in Washington and i was not impressed with Microsoft. And im still waiting for my free copy of FSX that was promised to all pre-registered folks.Microsoft in due respect im hoping and im sure there is a firm or persons out there that is developing a sim that will compare to FS9/FSX, until then i have to be beholding to you.True hard core simmer.........Robert

> Hornit's in the "armchair" category?He must have been sitting in his armchair to have written that reply...?I hangar with a commercial airline pilot, and his Pitt's M-12 with a Russian radial. He was also my aerobatic instructor years ago. I'm also friends or have associates who are commercial pilots active and retired. Our common interest is the EAA and high performance kit/homebuilts. What we don't do, is talk flight sim, or airline shop talk. But we do talk and get very involved in flight activites other than airline enviroment. Hornit's reply to me, was as though my type of flying, which is actually the same type of flying, that many of these indivuals that I mentioned above, do in adddition to their "job", didn't account for anything. He used the word "we", as though it was me against everyone else, which certainly is not the case. It was also implied that I'm happy with 12-17 fps, which is not true either.Putting it another way, his reply isn't one that I would have expected from someone with his qualifications. I've stated numerous times, that FS9 is a better airport/airliner simulator at the moment. We'll let it go at that.L.Adamson

Imagine there is another new sim available. Now imagine that this other sim is also caught up in the multicore/vista/dx10 mess, which would indoubtedly be the case due to the current status of technology and marketing.The forum would be divided into families, each with its own sub-forum, at odds with each other. However, the content of each forums would most probably be more constructive and positive, within the perspective of each sim, and there would be little or no inter-forum confrontation.The FS9 forum was created because there seemed to be 2 such families. The problem being, of course, that FS9 and FSX are closely related, to say the least, and both MS, conundrum which generates in people a very high level of irritation and frustration.You cannot play chess against yourself.A scenario, which could have been playable would have been for MS to create 2 sim entities, with separate lines of budget, separate management, separate strategies. We would have had 2 new sims, each probably better than the one we have, one perhaps outstandingly better, and no rancour.