Warning-Orlando scenery not compatible with Vista

[Guest ecv737]

I am not a Techie so I find the instructions given to be able to deal with Vista and KMCO scenery quite confussing, mainly for ME.I understand that you rationalize that this is not a Cloud9 problem but due to the new feature put in by MSoft which is different to that of XP.However since this is a PAYWARE addon I would had expected that you could come up with an installation exe which makes the whole procedure Transparent to non techies like me.I also fully agree with NG4IX comments: Wise statements.........Edmundo CardenasCaracas, Venezuela

[Guest craigjjs]

You have not accurately stated the facts. Here is what actually happened:1) I download the demo2) I read the multipage installation guide3) I install it with no problems or warnings4) FSX will not start, crashes to desktop6) I reboot computer7) I try again. FSX will not start, crashes to desktop8) I again read the multipage installation guide and the website (but not the forums)and the product manual that was installed with the software. I find nothing about Vista or any similar problems.9) I uninstall the demo10) I try again. FSX will not start, crashes to desktop11) I reinstall FSX12) I find the vendor's forum and learn that this has been an issue known to the vendor for some time.13) I post a warning on AVSIM hoping to prevent others from having a similar experience.Please don't change the facts to accomodate your arguments. If the addon simply did not install, you would be correct. That was not the problem. Installation, in accordance with the vendor's instructions, resulted in a disabled FSX installation.

[Mike... 7]

>2) "Virtuali" is to Cloud9 as Honeywell is to any aircraft>manufacturer. He simply supplies a tool that Cloud9 uses>under license. To "condemn" Cloud9 for this would be as>irrational as condeming Cessna because you have a beef with a>Honeywell representative.The problem is, he doesn't just supply a tool. If he did just that, I wouldn't have a problem with him or Cloud9. But it doesn't end there. Pretty much on every site other than Cloud9's own, he is the one speaking "on behalf of" Cloud9. If someone has an issue, technical or otherwise, he's the first on the scene. As illustrated by this thread for example. And he will go to great lengths to defend Cloud9's business and the direction they've been going in after the release of FSX. As long as you have nothing bad to say, all is well, but offer some criticism and you'll get an attitude. From all of them. I don't really buy the language argument, they've been around long enough and from what I've read (long comprehensible posts, CAPS usage...), there's nothing wrong with their English. Perhaps it's an Italian thing.- A former Cloud9 customer and non-native English speaker's two cents

[jcboliveira 1]

Already used several F1 wrappers without DEP problems. I don't have your product but SR22 also have DEP problems. I just bcedit and the problem went away as it's suposed to. Jos

[mgh 89]

Exactly. This is payware. The Original Poster downloaded a Cloud9 product, installed it according to Cloud9's own instructions and it crashed his FSX. The developer's supporter (and others) argue that the original poster shouldn't have complained about it but should have searched Cloud9's forums for a work-around.Cloud9 clearly knew it instructions were faulty in early February this year. Why, therefore, didn't Cloud9 change its instructions? By not doing so, Cloud9 deserves any criticism it gets here for its attitude to its customers.Incidentally, under the UK Computer Misuse Act (which I believe mirrors EU legislation) it is a criminal offence to do "...any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer." Cloud9 clearly knowes that its product causes a modification that the downloader clearly hasn't authorised - I doubt any downloader authorised Cloud9 to crash his FSX.

[n4gix 4,947]

>10) I try again. FSX will not start, crashes to desktop>11) I reinstall FSXCraig, there's a very important lesson to be learned here, quite apart from anything else that's been discussed.As has been the case for years, "reinstalling" should be the very last resort. I have had FS9 installed since the day it was released, and in all of these years, in spite of all the "things" I've done to it......not ONCE have I ever had to reinstall it...The same has held true with FSX, in spite of having tortured it mercilessly with multiple beta tests, new aircraft, et cetera.The very first step should be: rename the fsx.cfg file and then attempt to load FSX, allowing it to build a new, virgin fsx.cfg file. Ninety-nine percent of the time this will "fix" whatever was wrong... ;)There are a few other diagnostic steps one can also make should the fsx.cfg file rebuild not be successful, such as deleting or renaming the default scenery.cfg, or the default flight (.flt) file, and so forth, but before trying them......come here and ask! The odds are that there's more than one person who's had that or a similar problem and can point you to a soultion. ;)

[Guest craigjjs]

Thank you. That is helpful.