Remember, it's an Inquirer article...Indicates DX10 will not make the Vista consumer release date. Firstly affects FSX and Crysis...http://www.theinquirer.org/default.aspx?article=36551:(

I learned with time and experience to never believe the first announcement of a release date. The first one is always BS. So when I heard this one (DX-10 patch) for Q1 2007. I didn't beleive it, so I am not disapointed today ;)Anyway, the more time we give them ...the more things will be fixed.

This doesn't surprise me at all if it's true. Judging by the fact that MS says that they are working on a 'performance' patch *rolls eyes* for fsx tells me that the dx10 patch will be delayed some amount of time because of that. There are still no vista drivers for the 8800 hardware to test with anyway, at least for the average Joe. I have vista final running on two laptops and I get a minimum of 2 blue screens a day on either of them, and one of the laptops was designed for vista...This OS is starting to remind me more and more of windows ME and how unstable it was and how it would blue screen on you if you looked at it funny. I was all gung ho on installing vista on my gaming pc and was very disappointed that nvidia is dragging their feet on releasing a vista driver for a supposedly vista-ready 8800 card, but after all the blue screens that i have been getting on my laptops i am very apprehensive to install vista on my game machine.

I think I read from the DX team that MS never planned DX10 support for Vista upon release. Although, the DX10 API is installed with Vista the desktop will be still rendered in FS9 and MS plans to push out a DX10 update a few months after release.Pat

Sad to hear all this, why do those marketing guys get us all hyped up and then get out the pin to pop the balloon.Still hard to believe that nvidia havent sorted any drivers for the 8800 on vista yet, surely they must come soon, unless 'Houston we have a problem'I do think microsoft and the vista delays/changes has caused no end of disruption to the industry. Looks like it could be some time before it all settles down. :-violin

>I learned with time and experience to never believe the first>announcement of a release date. >>The first one is always BS. So when I heard this one (DX-10>patch) for Q1 2007. I didn't beleive it, so I am not>disapointed today ;)>>Anyway, the more time we give them ...the more things will be>fixed.I'm afraid you and the Inquirer are both very much mistaken. The DX10 patch was NEVER scheduled for Q1 2007, the first FSX patch will be to deal with issues identified since launch in the XP/DX9 environment. Phil Taylor of ACES has made that perfectly clear on several occasions - DX10 patch LATE NEXT YEAR. Just search these forums for actual hard fact.And if the Inkwirer gets that wrong, what else are they wrong about, eh?Could they have confused DX10 with DX10.1, I wonder? ;)Allcott

I don't know where you got dx10 patch late next year from??? AFAIK there has been no timetable on it other than ASAP. It is in MS's best interest to get it out sooner rather than later seeing as they are hyping vista as a gamer's OS and there are no other 3rd party games coming out for it until q2 at the earliest since the delays of alan wake, crysis, and halo2. If MS wants vista to be taken seriously as a gamer's OS then this fsx dx10 patch NEEDS to be out by march at the latest.

At this point I'm going to go ahead and just stop caring. I've uninstalled FSX, now waiting for the "patch" and waiting for Microsoft's hype machine to actually produce something worthwhile.

On discussing a forthcoming performance patch, on November 30th, Phil Taylor said:"One additional comment, this is not the DX10 update, that is later next year as a separate release."To read the sentence in context, goto:http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/default.aspxFrom the tone of the blog I doubt he meant early or 1Q 2007.

I've always said that the reason they said they are going to release this 'performance' patch is so that they could extend the deadline of the dx10 patch. That makes more sense to me than anything seeing as they have never in the history of their flight sims released a patch that added any noticeable performance. This is of course all speculation anyway but after all the constant delays i have seen with dx10 pc games in the past couple of months it fits the mold. PC games are dead anyway and just about anything we get these days is usually a console port. The game runs stellar on my new machine anyway so at this point i could care less what they do...

The FSX update was NEVER promised to coincide with the consumer release date for Vista (Jan 30). It has always been described as coming "in 2007" and the Aces team has said that it will arrive at some point after Vista releases. The real problem here seems to be when web sites (known for bad information) spin facts to try and imply some conspiracy or failing on Microsoft's part. The reality is that nothing at all is new here and nothing at all has changed.

This whole Vista/DX10 fiasco has really botched up this release of Flight Simulator (FSX). If Vista (with DX10) was released ahead of FSX as it was supposed to be (like most past releases of FS were), we most likely wouldn't have the problems with FSX we have today. Performance would not be an issue because Aces would have fully been able to optimize and develop FSX for one environment. With each delay it's pushing things farther and farther back concerning the ultimate solution for FSX. We have a longer now wait to see how FSX will ultimately perform. Until Vista/DX10 we're never going to know the final outcome of FSX performance and future hardware compatibility. This is the biggest travesty of this latest release. Waiting for other departments at Redmond to get their act together so software can be written and optimized for the new environment. I'm now starting to feel I can't totally hold Aces responsible for the shortcomings of FSX. When I hear about more delays on critical pieces of the next OS environment, that has to be a nightmare for any software developer (after all these guys have quotas to meet and customers to please). Aces promised a patch but if it's true DX10 will be delayed then that pushed the patch out that much farther. They could still release a patch but for what, Vista alone??? It's not Vista that we're waiting to see released, it's the new DX10 environment that's been promised to do wonders for the look, feel, and performance of FSX.

You have to take this in perspective. I can promise you that most of us here on the forums know more about the status of FSX than many webzines. Look at the first sentence:"WE DON'T know the exact date but we know that Flight Simulator X, one of the first DirectX 10 patched titles has been delayed."FSX a DX 10 "patched" title? Huh? FSX is not "patched" for DX9 much less DX10!!! :-lol First, FSX was positioned as a Vista flagship gaming release. Now, when MS made that announcement with great fanfare many ASSUMED that a Vista flagship title will take advantage of the things for which Vista has become known, ergo, DX10. As it turned out FSX has absolutely nothing to do with Vista and as a Vista user, ironically, FSX seems to actually performs WORSE on Vista than it does on XP!With that said, many who heard about FSX and Vista months back but didn't follow it after the actual FSX release are now interested again because of the immenant release of Vista next month. Hence a call to Microsoft and a reply that DX10 functionality will not be ready. Well, really? I think we already knew that, so this is no news at all for us, but a stunning revelation for them.Crysis and FSX are the two titles that all eyes have been on for Vista release and I know that the team at Crysis are still chugging away with full dependence on DX10 and hardware availablilty because it is a DX10 only title. FSX, meanwhile, has been released and I believe that many not in the know believe that FSX is merely waiting for Vista to get excitedly loaded on your hard drive and WHAMMO, FSX in all its glory, but that is obviously not the case, and many behind the information curve are surprised.At the end of the day, Aces may indeed have been served well to have waited for DX10 and hardware to be released and made FSX a DX10 only title (of course, the product release managers do not always see things so matter-of-factly) so what the release of FSX did do was confuse a great many people and many still associate Vista with FSX.DX10 already exists in Vista, however, methinks that DX10 SDKs and hardware may not be ready making DX10 in Vista a point of suffering for developers until any issues are fixed and the proper tools are available so the DX10 can move forward. After all, if ACES couldn't pull DX10 off in FSX in time, and they WORK for Microsoft, the other title developers don't stand much of a chance either!Aces never promised a date for a DX10 refresh for FSX, and likewise, no dates for their DX9 performance upgrade nor their Dual Core upgrade were ever given. WE know all this, its just the rest of the world who think that FSX is somehow a Vista title that seem to be caught of guard.

I imagine that in the first go-round, the idea was to have FSX ready to show off Vista/DX10. Of course, during the development pipeline Vista and DX10 slipped, so the emphasis in FSX had to shift to Win XP, with Vista pushed back to "after launch". FSX would have to run in XP in any case, but there is the question if pushing back the DX10 code path hurt performance. No doubt considerable development time and resources were lost by having to push on the XP code, leaving the DX10 on the shelf for now. And now MS have committed to doing more XP/DX9 development for performance reasons, which has to impact the Vista/DX10 development.scott s..

Has no one yet read the title to this article? :-xxrotflmao I can't wait for the new Flight Stimulator to arrive!