I can see some carrier night landing missions coming.... :)Ian.

Looking forward to flying the F18.I must say Phil your blog entry seems somewhat defensive or disappointed that more is not offered? The product seems exciting to me as the F18 and carrier is well worth $30. I would have thought your post would be more upbeat with fancy screen shots showing the DX9 vs DX10 differences, giving more examples of framerate changes, eye candy shots of Acceleration in action?Quick question, how are the decisions made for what features to add? Example: Adding VC shadows as opposed to outside scenery enhancments, orDeciding to focus on water enhancements vs land?Do you poll existing users, have a test group, etc?One more, if we turn bloom off and leave water on 1.x any framerate increase?

ok ok.. intelligent conversation-The service pack does show improvement, and that is something we not only expect but take for granted.SO- 20% Better performance,so I decide to upgrade.1. I need Vista thats $300. 2. DX10 will not work unless I upgrade to a DX10 card (that is already assuming that I have a motherboard that can support PCI Express- if I dont there is another $100, so lets say there goes atleast another $600.3. Ok so now it will work but there goes the 20% because my CPU is nearly 2 years old (AMD3800 core duo), so i have to buy a new CPU thats another $300 atleast for a decent one.So far I have spent 1200 to move to an unstable unsupported OS (which is a fact for HP users when thinking about things like printers and so on) to gain possibly 20% performance and what is really Slight IMHO graphical improvements. And the cockpit thing, some user mentioned Test Drive Unlimited and they implemented amazing incockpit shadows without evening mentioning DX10. I mean dissapointed?? You bet! I dont blame you at all Phil and I really appreciate you being honest, but it seems to me there is something really Rotten in microsoft, and where is the competition? oh wait microsoft bought out most of it. And FSX Accelleration? what is that about- another money grab??? All that time could have been spent on ground physics or even crepusculur rays!Really, Really sad day for true longterm committed hardcore simmer fans. Not to mention the fact that you clearly said that you will move on after this. To me- the paying customer that means that I will be thrown out there with a half complete product (let's also remember initial release was also dissapointing to many) and feel ripped off. All in all I can see Microsoft comming down with the rest of american market and their business practice of making the quarterly numbers.. very sad.

>Is it safe to say:>That in order to get the SP-2, "you HAVE to BUY the accel>addon"?>>$70 for game + $30 for a "PATCH". >>If so, I'll go back to fs-9, and start looking into X-Plane>more closely.>ed>>If you want SP2 on Oct. 23rd, you'll have to pony up $30. If you want SP2 for free, you'll have to wait until December or beyond.Time or Money, take your pick.By-the-by, checking out X-plane is a good idea on any account. Having a diverse marketplace is the key to competition-induced innovation. If you are a developer, you'll know what wonders competition between Java and .NET have wrought.

>Of course as the engine moves forward for other products...(in a Homer Simpson stylee): "Mmmmmmm, Tain Sim"

>Thank you for that...I've been trying logically go through>the differences between a game and fs in my head and you just>explained it perfectly.>>When you sit down and map out what a flight sim has to do>including AI, flight dynamics, graphics, inputs, etc.... you>really see how taxing it can be on any system.I was hesitant to include AI in the mention, because there's some nice decision-making AI systems in games, take Company of Heroes for example. But in working with the AI planes in FSX and SimConnect, I began to realize that the program isn't just running them along a predefined course, it's actually flying all of the AI planes.So I guess that maybe cancels out. Depends on what game we are talking about.I will be building a demo in my graphics studies, and I think I want to do a rudimentary flight sim, showing that it is possible to push it to the max, if you want no realistic flight simulation whatsoever.

Hello"That is 20% better FPS under load."The default Extra flying over water with an island in the background is hardly "Under Load"http://www.freewebs.com/reading1871/30.jpg

>in acceleration there is F-18, why. most of us cant fly 600>knots without blurries anyway.I think the Appeal of the F-18 is to make Carrier landings.

> I mean dissapointed?? You bet! I dont blame you at all Phil>and I really appreciate you being honest, but it seems to me>there is something really Rotten in microsoft, and where is>the competition? oh wait microsoft bought out most of it. Two things...1) Blame - Phil has been open with us and most of us appreciate that. Phil is human. Phil IS the project manager, you can cast some blame his way. He represents the product/project and is responsible for it.2) Competition - You are correct, in spirit, that competition is good. However, other than buying flight simulator itself from BAO, which other flight simulator did Microsoft buy?

>This is good news, I look forward to adding this to my FSX>setup. I must admit that I'm still a little confused>regarding DX9 and DX10. I currently run both FS9 and FSX on>XP, and both have their own dedicated HDs. I don't anticipate>upgrading to Vista until after SP1 is out, but I do intend on>getting a DX10 capable card later this year to improve my>overall rig and get ready for the upgrade to Vista.>>My questions are:>>1) I understand that if I apply SP2 to XP, I will only get the>DX9 benefits that are a part of SP2 regardless of whether the>video card is DX10 or not. What happens if I upgrade to Vista>after I apply SP2 in XP? Does FSX all of sudden run in DX10>"mode" or does SP2 need to be reapplied?SP2 updates the game to have both code paths available, regardless of operating system. Most of the time, 3D programs pull CAPS (capabilities) off of the video card to see what features are available to the program and makes decisions based off of that.If a DX10 card or DX10 itself is not present (i.e. on XP) then the option for the DX10 preview should not be present. >>2) Will FS9 run in Vista with SP2 applied?>SP2 is just a change to FSX bits, so it shouldn't touch FS9 at all.>Thanks,>C.Once again, this is just my understanding of things. ACES can, of course, correct or clarify.

>ok ok.. intelligent conversation->>The service pack does show improvement, and that is something>we not only expect but take for granted.SO- 20% Better>performance,so I decide to upgrade.>1. I need Vista thats $300. >2. DX10 will not work unless I upgrade to a DX10 card (that is>already assuming that I have a motherboard that can support>PCI Express- if I dont there is another $100, so lets say>there goes atleast another $600.>3. Ok so now it will work but there goes the 20% because my>CPU is nearly 2 years old (AMD3800 core duo), so i have to buy>a new CPU thats another $300 atleast for a decent one.>>So far I have spent 1200 to move to an unstable unsupported OS>(which is a fact for HP users when thinking about things like>printers and so on) to gain possibly 20% performance and what>is really Slight IMHO graphical improvements. And the cockpit>thing, some user mentioned Test Drive Unlimited and they>implemented amazing incockpit shadows without evening>mentioning DX10.>> I mean dissapointed?? You bet! I dont blame you at all Phil>and I really appreciate you being honest, but it seems to me>there is something really Rotten in microsoft, and where is>the competition? oh wait microsoft bought out most of it. >>And FSX Accelleration? what is that about- another money>grab??? All that time could have been spent on ground physics>or even crepusculur rays!>>Really, Really sad day for true longterm committed hardcore>simmer fans. Not to mention the fact that you clearly said>that you will move on after this. To me- the paying customer>that means that I will be thrown out there with a half>complete product (let's also remember initial release was also>dissapointing to many) and feel ripped off. >>All in all I can see Microsoft comming down with the rest of>american market and their business practice of making the>quarterly numbers.. very sad.>I don't mean to just off-handedly dismiss your comments, but I think a few clarifications are in order.I can understand the desire to avoid the basic version of an operating system, but a step up from that, Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade is only $160 dollars in the U.S., not $300. I believe you have to get Ultimate to get to $300.In addition to that, there are dx9 improvements as well as the dx10 preview, so you don't even need the dx10 card or Vista anyways, although I would suggest it.You know what? You're just here to bash, so I have clue why I should continue to waste my time trying to be rational with you.

"So far I have spent 1200 to move to an unstable unsupported OS"No, you haven't spent squat. You state so in all your "I need", If I wanted"parameters.Most folks can't afford a real plane. Sounds like you can't afforda simulator.Are we supposed to "chip in" to help you out?

This has been said over and over but just about every version of FS has required some investment in hardware, welcome to the world of gaming. I've been through it for 20 years and have not always had the financial leeway to upgrade so have had to make due with what I had.My first ever upgrade was a 5 1/4 floppy drive for the commodore 64 because Sublogics flight simulator did not run on a tape but came on some new fangled technology on a precariously fragile disk.FS9 is a great aleternative if you don't have the financial depth to upgrade but I'm wondering what the average life cycle is for a computer?As far as Vista, well, I upgraded in January, cost me 10 bucks and a new system from Dell and have had no CTD's or any other problems. Whoever keeps comparing it to ME never used ME, ME crashed all the time, Vista has yet to do so for me, and my HP printer runs like a charm.As far as Acceleration, considering 3 new aircraft, a multitude of missions and a slew of enhancements for 30 bucks, I just can't complain not to mention SP2/DX10 will be a free update so if one does not have an interest in Acceleration you can still reap the benefits of the updates for free, just at a later time.

>Could someone explain what these mean please. :-) >>8-core bug fix >3G enabling FSX and Autogen memory use optimization >Apparently there was a bug with 8 cores. Of which I'm guessing that only Aces was aware- Who's running on 8 cores. Four, sure, but 8 right now?Meaning that you can use the /3G switch in your OS to address more memory space. Probably the number one reason for CTD due to out of memory. DX takes a copy of all of your textures and puts it into system ram as well as the video card. There's a Vista patch, but not one for XP (nor will there ever be one as the XP code path is End Of Life).I'm excited for this. It's the first real steps to distance FS from the older than dirt DX engine (the roots go back to fs2000)and all of the limitations that it brings. While I'm not expecting a top down rewrite of the engine, the further batching extends the support for more cores. The new lighting looks more natural and not overblown. I was never expecting the magic screenies to truly come to life. The current state of technology is beyond what we saw. I'm imporessed that it tooka 'reasonable' development effort to get the new DX10 renderer online.I'm still unclear about calling the DX10 stuff a preview. IS is safe to say that what we'll be recieving is more along the lines of proof of concept, and that the 'true' 'native' DX10 engine will arrive in FS11 where the backwards compat is being dropped?Clearly now Aces is moving on to FS 11 and quite possibly devoting some of their resources to MSTS2 which uses the same core engine. Speaking of, I have seen nothing of the new MSTS yet. It's due "For the Holidays 2007" IIRC. Working for a major transit agency and taking the train to work every day, I'm very interested :) I'd love to see push/pull commuter ops for MSTS.Some of the issues I see continue- State of hardware and state of DX. What ACES can do is totally dependent upon these underlying technologies. IF there is a disconnect, you get what we've seen (that has been largely fixed by the SPs) but at least it has been fixed.My four year old PC runs FSX surprisingly well. I use normal Autogen and even have vehicles on, and It's largely flyable excpet for major cities (LA and NYC the major offenders) I can fly out of Boston just fine. With loaded AI traffic, only a few other airports are unflyable (ORD, ATL) but I can live. I'll do a Penryn in January since I'm receiving a number of parts for Christmas. It'll be a whole new sim then, even if I drop in a Pentium D as a placeholder until Penryn releases.

The most comical aspect of the whole fiasco:http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...ls/directx.mspxit's still up on the MS website.