I dont post that often here, but I have uploaded several repaints. With amazement do I read the negative FSX posts. Yes I have some performance issues, but I can live with them.The only reason I started a new post is because I want Phil Taylor and other MS/FSX/Aces guys to know that all your hard work is appreciated. You guys are damned if you do and damned if you dont. To be honest I would not have the patience to reply to some of these naysayers, but hats off to you Phil. I for one will patiently wait for whatever patch you guys come up with.Paul

Hi Paul-The moderators are going to do their best to enforce that there is no more bashing-of any kind to anyone.Hope you will feel comfortable posting more often!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Microsoft and ACES are not charties they are businesses if they produce products that have problems with them, people have a right to make criticisms of them. If everything is just fantastic with FSX perhaps you could explain to me why when I visted the store of a major British computer games retailer recently, they had no copies of FSX but were retailing FS2004 at its original and full list price. Best and Warm RegardsAdrian Wainer

Adrian-The poster spoke of "bashing" which is different from criticisms.Hopefully most know the difference.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Dear Geofa, I fully take you point onboard, e.g. I personally have said that it is unfortunate that MSFS X does not support dual cores at a higher level but I have criticized neither ACES nor MS on this issue, since software development takes a long time and presumably when the structure of MSFS X was finalized, it looked as if Intel could produce faster single core processors instead of hiting a brick wall on increasing on clock speed. That said, Paul's post is much less a legitimate defence of Microsoft and ACES which he would be entirely correct to engage in, than the sort of broad brush criticism deserved and undeserved but this time around directed against anybody who would criticise Microsoft and ACES.Best and Warm RegardsAdrian Wainer

I find the excessive fsx bashing very disappointing. The one thing I think I see in common amongst the bashers is that their expectations were preset incorrectly (either by themselves, or ms marketing).Well...in my judgement the seed for even worse bashing is being sown right now.It appears that nobody has discussed the percent fps increase that would make bashers happy. Its possible nothing less than 100% improvement in sp1 will be accepted by bashers as acceptable.Now I get 15 to 20 fps on my e6600 with 4 gigs of memory. I have smooth enjoyable flights with tons of autogen in view. Very rarely, it will slow a bit more over heavy scenery like downtown seattle.The stated goal of 20% improvement (if interpreted as 20% higher fps) would calculate out to 3 to 4 additional fsp on my normal flight. That will take me from nice to nicer. I'll enjoy that, but then, I'm not a basher.For the bashers, I've read folks getting 5 to 10 fps, and demanding 30 min. See the coming new round of bashing? If you set settings so that you get 5 to 10 fps, you add 20%, now you get 6 to 12fps. If you demand 30fps, you'll be unsatisfied post sp1.

The difference is that avsim will not tolerate bashing anymore and bashers will be removed-permanently. Critics is a different story...and just in case I am going to lock this thread lest it go south quickly.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Bob I think there are some people that want to have their cake and eat it, in that if MSFS X came less fully featured but because of that one could run it at higher frame rates, they would be complaining that FS X did not have many new features in relation to FS 9. As for myself I have turned down some of the sliders added an extra 1 Gigabyte of memory put in two 7600GT card to replace a 6600GT and am now getting acceptable frame rates about 18 over Seattle with an Athlon AMD 64 4800 dualie. I was flying over Seattle with a photographic scenery installed and was watching the trucks and cars on the motorways, which was something amazing! Best and Warm RegardsAdrian wainer

I just posted over in the Hardware section and I think one of the reasons (not the only one of course) for some of the random crashes and BSOD's running FSX is that the PSU's in many so called "high spec" PC's are not up to the job of sustaining the CPU and GPU to run a demanding programme.That aside, I suspect the main issue is that FSX is still a bit barebones compared to the rich customised FS9 many of us had. That said, i've got my Aerosim Jetliners 2 up and running fine and as I type this running Trans-Oceanic from KHNL to KLAX. Might be me, but the DC10 sounds better in FSX than it did in FS9.It's still flight and what other programme gives you the whole world as a playground.