And yet they advertise, even on avsim: "Along with all systems simulation and a complete and ultra-realistic flight computer, the Airbus Series Vol.1 will definitely be part of the best simulation software available" Peter, have you noticed that another thread critisizing Wilco/Feelthere has disappeared from the FSX board?

http://www.white-clouds.org/Default.aspx?CategoryID=3For the rest, I'm no expert, but I think that there are extremely good and new things in all domains of a sim taken separately (i.e. weather, ground, flight models). The problem would be to find a way to link them together in an interactice structure...

And, yes, I would spend that money and more. Even up front if need be. As to "big bucks", I'm not so sure about that... What market size do you guess? I'd say 30,000 to 50,000 tops. But if it's fun, it's worth it.

Look on the FS9 forum.

Trust me Glenn,I honestly hope my concerns about performance is unfounded and will be fixed.If not then I owe it to myself and our community to do what I can to change things for the better.I am very worried about performance.I'm also working on a very advanced Airbus project that won't be coming out for a long time yet. I face the same problems that Wilco suffer and Airliner XP and on the surface at least it looks like advanced airliners will have problems on FSX.My hope is that ACES will do what they promise and make the simulator future proof and make it work full on DX10 and dual cores.My gut feeling is though this won't happen.I feel like I'm betting on Russian Roulette trying to make something special and unique or advanced for later in the year.Let me put it all another way. I have a development team. We all work on FS related products and have no passion or desire to work on a train simulator or other game products. If we ever do it will be for money and not passion. Passion is the greatest motivator to produce excellence.What is needed is a new simulator that users passionate people who will focus exclusively on one product. A flight simulator that's real.Peter

G

Quote from Peter Wilding: "FSX does not support a Core 2 duo"Peter, that's a bold statement, and I have no idea if what you've said about C2D is correct, but if true, it's concerning. However, I just did a intensive search on Google and some newsgroups and can't find any more information on these problems. Can you help us with some more information? If these issues are easily reproduced and consistent, why aren't they being scrutinzed more thoroughly with more information available?I just spent a boat load on a new Core 2 Extreme based system, and you've dropped some huge bombs with very little additional information to back up your assertions. Any additional information to help us understand these potentially troubling issues would be helpful.

I am not really sure, but the memory leak issue sounds more like a software issue, than a hardware CPU issue.I have to recall some college knowledge, but I think the OS handles the memory management and sends the instruction to the CPU which in return relays it to the chipset, which manages the physical storage of the memory. Or wait, the more modern CPUs bypass the chipset to address the memory directly, so you might have a point here. But it still sounds more like an OS or low-level driver quirk, because I haven't heard about the issues that you're experiencing. Interesting, keep us posted.Pat

"Or wait, the more modern CPUs bypass the chipset to address the memory directly, so you might have a point here"Only the AMD Athlon 64 has an on die memory controller.The Core 2 Duo's still use the Northbridge to address memory.Glenn

After the infamous Pentium I division bug Intel added an option to update the CPU for critical bugfixes. Even if the Core 2 DUO CPU has a memory management issue it could probably be fixed with a microcode update in a new BIOS for your mainboard.

Peter I would diffidently want to be on board for your effort. If you take an engine on the level of FS9 and add all the underlying elements that was requested for FSX along time ago, that would be something. I'm talking things like better turbo prop modeling, SID/STAR implementation in ATC, heck better more involved detailed ATC engine period, and a overall more realistic flight dynamics engine period would more than suffice. Peter another Simulator on the market would do as it's done in the past and that's cause Aces to improve Flight Simulator in areas they've traditionally overlooked. Without the threat of a new Simulator to challenge Flight Simulator FS11 could very well be more of the same (better framerate intense graphics with little else under the hood). Sometimes a kick in the #### is what they need from time to time to let them know realism is not half bad. Turning FS into a true mindless toy might not be the way to go. Peter if you could accomplish steller performance with an engine comparable to FS9, that would more than raise eyebrows and say something to the naysayers who are so used to the Microsoft excuse that we need to constantly by 'MORE HARDWARE' and then turn around and 'BUY MORE HARDWARE'. The most important thing is the meat of the sim. The stuff that pilots want like leaving deicing off causes icing on the wings which in turn causes a very premature ending to one's flight. Accomplishing things like that would push your sim over the top (or should I say our sim ;-))... Whatever you do we need to keep the VC revolution going. Although compatibility with 2D panels is good, we need a sim able to use products like PMDG's 744. Developers wouldn't have to change whole formates with each new release of this sim. One thing I didn't like about Fly was the way the sky looked. The horizon really needs to stretch out at high altitudes. Maybe you could figure out a way to have autogen only display at lower altitudes and all but disappear as you climb to the higher levels where seeing it is no longer needed. Geofa came up with this and I'm sure Aces didn't bother listening for FSX's SP1. It would be nice to bring Flight Simming back in the hands of the simmers who love it versus a huge corporation looking to sell exclusively to quick fix gamers (Flight Simulator shouldn't be on the same shelf as Halo. I always thought that was like putting QBASE for music production on the same shelf as a game). Just like Linux it could be open source allowing major improvements in graphics and other wise by this very community. People speak of dollars but it's funny how long Linux has been out for the serious computer geek. Mozilla is another one, a great browser that's free and works. The new sim need not be free but marketed to the right market therefore being taken seriously by that market (aviation enthusiast). If that were to happen 'MS Flight Simulator' could by all means go by way of the XBOX360 (as it's currently doing anyway) and no one would care especially in this community because we have alternatives. The bottom line is we need a simulation platform built by simmers and controlled by simmers. If we could get the underlying code of FS9 (I'm dreaming) that would be a perfect example of a good starting point. The sky's the limit from there...Peter one last note, MAKE THIS THING COMPATIBLE WITH MAC's SO WE CAN BE DONE WITH THIS HARDWARE CRAP ONCE AND FOR ALL. Because the community is so acclimated to PC's it would be a gradual change but weaning off Windows would be a greater benefit down the road than staying with Windows based simulation. It's well known applications run a heck of allot better on Mac's than Windows based machines. We'll have to upgrade here and there but Apple is a better longer lasting machine all the way around (I keep thinking of it, Microsoft is going by way of XBOX while we're going by way of Apple. Shows who's serious about simulation and who's not)... :-)Peter please PM me if your seriously getting started on something like this...

Peter; Do you have your memory usage configured for best performance for system cache (as opposed to programs)? It's a much-discussed tweak that I have found to be the root cause of some ugly out-of-memory errors on my Core 2 Extreme system.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

FSX on my box performs fairly well. I get good performance, and good detail. Scenery is set at extremely dense, Autogen is dense, though tweaked to 600 trees, and 800 buildings per cell. Most of the time, I can fly for hours without any problems. I do get Out of memory errors on startup forcing me to go into the program a second, sometimes a third time, before it starts up ok. I've pulled up the task manager to see if I'm actually running out of memory when this happens, and it shows I'm not, I have around 1.4gb available at time of this error. According to MS KB they state the problem is caused by a corrupt page file, they suggest zeroing it out, then selecting the let window's handle the page file option. I've tried that, and the problem seemed worse, so I went back to a fixed size (4096MB). The only other problem I have is ocaisionally, and this seems to be happening less frequently over time for some reason, so I won't knock it. I sometimes get a CTD about 5 to 10 minutes in flight, but that seems to be a video driver issue. I had this with my old system with an ATI X800XT card. It went away though when I switched to a Nvidia card. This system has ATI X1950XTX Crossfire cards. ATI for me always gave me trouble in FS with their drivers. If I could get by to first few minutes without this CTD, I can usually get through the entire flight, no matter what the length. The furthest I've flown so far is New York to Hong Kong, and I just completed one from Manchester (UK) to Orlando, with no issues. You can check out the performance and detail I with what I just posted in the screenshot forum (LGA to ORD), as well as my video in the video forum. http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...51803&mode=fullMy system is an E6700 2GB with ATI X1950XTX Crossfires and 50GB HD in Raid/0 configuration.

Hey Peter...FedEx me a tin foil hat, will ya? I don't want MS and Intel stealing my thoughts. :-lolForgive me for being a bit skeptical, but I've never been big on conspiracy theories.Regarding the new sim, it would be interesting... If it materializes. Best of luck in that regard!Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

Same here npb at all lol on C2D E6600 :-)actually no ctd with FSX up until now even with the bus lolAll those so called rumors sometimes you get a headache here :-lolAndr