1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Not sure why you think thats a compliment.

You talked about the Windows user population in general ("people still using windows"). Now you talk about 0.00002% of that group (X-Plane users with more than one PC). Maybe you don't understand my comment because you switched the topic?

52 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

You talked about the Windows user population in general ("people still using windows"). Now you talk about 0.00002% of that group (X-Plane users with more than one PC). Maybe you don't understand my comment because you switched the topic?

You seem to think its a compliment to windows that no one uses it for tasks that require performance?

Its not, and also why ChromeOS has been demolishing its marketshare for the last few years.

Edited November 4, 20214 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

You seem to think its a compliment to windows that no one uses it for tasks that require performance?

No, its a compliment, when you say that Windows users don't care about performance. And, as you can't be really bothered if you don't care about something, I concluded, that Windows users are not bothered by performance.

 

4 hours ago, mSparks said:

yes, xp11 often needing more than one PC is often the first and only time they have ever used a piece of software where performance is a factor. Not sure why you think thats a compliment.

XP needing more than one PC because it cannot make use of more than 25 percent of the available CPU and GPU power is everything but a compliment for XP - and in no way a windows issue. No matter how hard you believe that, sorry.

I'm basically a Linux advocate myself but really, you're taking this too far 😉The fact that lots of things count as POSIX has no relevant meaning in a flightsim/win11 discussion. There's also a reason we aren't using our phones for flightsimming. 

Year of the Linux desktop anyone? 

If Linux and Mac will be the future niche for XP, we all know what that means in terms of sales if we're honest - and that it's not going to mean billions of copies to all those POSIX devices.

Edited November 4, 20214 yr by rka

23 minutes ago, rka said:

because it cannot make use of more than 25 percent of the available CPU

"it" being Windows:

52 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

when you say that Windows users don't care about performance

Saying Grandpa drives a 1960s VW beatle and doesn't care about performance, and tells everyone 30mph on the highway is "just fine" is not complimenting Gradpas driving.

Windows users not caring that Windows 11 has less performance than Windows 10 is not complimenting windows 11 users, and bad copy of the MacOS/Gnome UI doesn't make it any better.

Edited November 4, 20214 yr by mSparks

27 minutes ago, mSparks said:

"it" being Windows:

No, "it" being X-Plane. 

It was your screenshot recently, that showed how software on Windows in principal can scale properly with added hardware resources. Countless other benchmarks confirm it. So it is not a OS topic, if a software fails to make use of what the OS offers.

By continuous telling us how bad X-Plane runs on Window, you actually are criticizing X-Plane, and not the OS.

Edited November 4, 20214 yr by mrueedi

7 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

that showed how software on Windows in principal can scale properly with added hardware resources.

windows server

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/pricing

52 minutes ago, mSparks said:

"it" being Windows:

No, "it" being Laminar Research's ancient flight sim engine.

Even XP12 will prove you wrong, you will not even have to try any other halfway recent engine.

Also correlation vs causality. 

Lol again that 50% difference , chart , dude I run XP11 on both Windows 10 and Ubuntu 20 , the performance is more or less similar , just that under Linux its a bit smoother , but a 50% difference in your dreams.

1 hour ago, Humpty said:

Lol again that 50% difference , chart , dude I run XP11 on both Windows 10 and Ubuntu 20 , the performance is more or less similar , just that under Linux its a bit smoother , but a 50% difference in your dreams.

well, I keep asking people to post their screenshot of 250fps on the ground in xp11 but instead they just keep saying they only get 30fps, just 80fps would probably change my mind, considering I was getting that on a 4 core CPU from 2012.

mnmnIf they really are stuck at 30fps I dont see what other explanation there can be than

3 hours ago, rka said:

because it windows cannot make use of more than 25 percent of the available CPU

Because XP on Linux has no problem making 100% use of the available CPU and running at 250fps while doing so, even my cheap ###, non m1 mac mini can manage 50fps in the 744 using all its cpu.

Edited November 4, 20214 yr by mSparks

@mSparks Sure, just don't let reality get in your way 😉

 

Just now, rka said:

@mSparks Sure, just don't let reality get in your way 😉

 

So you do get 250fps in xplane then and were just trolling? 

Just now, mSparks said:

So you do get 250fps in xplane then and were just trolling? 

Erm... What?!

Just now, rka said:

Erm... What?!

Something - anything similar to 

500fps in space

or 250fps on the ground.

Just now, mSparks said:

Something - anything similar to 

500fps in space

or 250fps on the ground.

I suppose you are trying to say being able to render this image 500 times per second on 2020s hardware is somehow an achievement? Is that what you mean?