>There is where the difference is-I not blaming or absolving-I>am simply reporting....No, Geofa. "it is a pretty good guess that hardware is responsible" is not simply reporting. It is attempting to draw conclusions.But this is not getting us any closer to a solution. I'd rather talk about testing or a community survey or something that might help.

Please explain how when the only component changed on my system was the monitor-and blurries appeared only and instantly after this change was made (after 1 year and 1/2 of blurry free running)-what your logical conclusion would be?I'd be interested and so would Plato...http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

So let me see...I have had no blurries for a year 1/2-I make a single hardware change and now have them.Instead of being relieved that I now share your grief-you are now angry that I have reported my findings and find that is not helpful in perhaps reporting my testing and searching for a solution. My looking into the problem is "conclusions" but I suppose your looking into the problem has more validity somehow?I am really trying to understand your point-but it just seems honestly that you just want to be angry.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

I'm not angry.I want to take steps to find a solution and closing one's mind to the possibility that the software is possibly responsible is not helpful."Please explain how when the only component changed on my system was the monitor-and blurries appeared only and instantly after this change was made (after 1 year and 1/2 of blurry free running)-what your logical conclusion would be?I'd be interested and so would Plato..."In your position, my kneejerk reaction would be to blame the monitor. Then I would actually think about it and ask why something so seemingly innocent as a change of monitor makes this software run with problems that weren't there before. I'd also remember all the posts here about the installation of SP1 causing blurries. You have an opportunity that most of us don't. You turned a switch after SP1 and got them. Most of us had them from day 1 with SP1. Since there seems to be no concerted effort to discover the cause, people like you have the best chance of pinpointing it or at least narrowing it down. Because if it turns out that you can switch monitors and cure the problem, the question would still remain, WHY? The software cannot be eliminated from the possible answers to that question. It is not like those of us with blurries are all using faulty monitors.So I have no problem with you trying to draw conclusions, in fact I support it. But if your conclusions are not logical and are possibly harmful to the process of finding the solution, I feel I should point that out.

:-cool Your'e an absolute diamond Bill.Reading your posts are always 'Mind Expanding' and just lovethe way you 'Clarify' confusion.:-kewl

Wow!, after 11 years developing systems - and but now I know what an API is. Thank you!It sounds like you have little or no experience in actual programming. The point is: if your program uses the API in the wrong way, then your program is not going to work properly.I will give a simple example using a database API. The program uses the API to read data from the database and display it on the web. Perfect you say! But one day BOOM!! it crashes! why?? the program code didn't close the connection to the database. Result: too many open connections! So you can see, its not the fault of the database API, its your program at fault, as it used the API in the wrong way and failed to close the connection.FS problems are like this. They boil down to bad code. Not hardware, not drivers, not API's. It's bad code.

Geofa,to get to the bottom of this : - you only changed your monitor, you did not change drivers, install any add ons, patches, etc ...- the new monitor has a higher resolution. Are you running FSX at the same resolution as your desktop ? For some reason, FSX prefers this. You could test this by running both your desktop and FSX at the old resolutions, once with the new monitor, if the blurries remain, try again with the old monitor.If in this case (old monitor, old resolution) the blurries remain, at what refresh rate are you running your monitor ? Try lowering it to 60.Probably you already did all this, but could you share the results ?Jan

According to my calculator the old resolution was producing 1440000 pixels while the new one pumps out 2318000. That's almost a million pixels more. Could it be that the rest of the hardware just can't keep up with the increased demands?Also, an LCD monitor is designed to show things properly at only one resolution, so if you try to lower it, it will be blurry and fuzzy anyhow. In addition, when you lower the resolution, check that you do so both in FSX and in the monitor's properties. And also, on a bigger screen image problems are more pronounced because its erm... bigger.Regards, Vassilis

so you are saying that after 25 years of MSFS, ACEs does not know how to properly program layers ? I tend to exclude this, the more that this problem only seems to occur in the DX10 code path, not in DX9.So there remain two possibilities : a bug in the API, or a bug in the drivers. Either way, it is not to ACEs to adapt their coding to work with a bug in one of the other components, it is up to the others to correct the bug.And after 20 years of gaming, I have seen enough games where exactly this kind of problems got solved by drivers, not by game developer.And I drop this discussion now, it is utterly pointless. I don't even know why I responded.Jan

Vassilis made a strong point which some choose to ignore.It has to have something to do with bandwidth or perhaps vid mem utilization.We are talking about a 61% increase in the number pixels. As I see it, that is a huge increase in required resources.Correction:Geofa stated 1440x900 which would be 1296000 pixels instead of 1440000.So we are actualy talking about a roughly 79% increase in pixels.

As I mentioned in my posts above-I have tried running the monitor in all resolutions-including its lowest at 1024x768 (and resetting the desktop the same)-and with sliders in their optimum low positions as suggested by Phil-the result is the same. My new monitor only runs at a refresh rate of 59 or 60.In any case the new problem was caused by the increases pixels, that would tend to also diminish faulty software as the problem. As an interesting sidenote-I am upgrading to a new faster system and a 8800gt late next week-it will be interesting to the results here.I did read Phil's articles he posted in this thread and it appears my monitor is a "dithering" monitor. I'd suspect this highly.In any case-yes I will continue to test and go back to old monitors to see what causes this. Right now I am leaning towards Phil's hypothesis highly.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

>Correction:>>Geofa stated 1440x900 which would be 1296000 pixels instead of>1440000.>>So we are actualy talking about a roughly 79% increase in>pixels.>>Oops... :+ (throws calculator out of the window...)Vassilis

Using your aurgument-there are a couple statements you make in this post that would not pass your own logic test...In any case-I will be testing more and reporting the results.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Hi Geof, did you try the good old "delete the fsx.cfg" trick?Regards,Vassilis

Yes-I've spent the last two weeks doing all the delete of cfg's and the usual tweaks in the fsx.cfg file.What I have left is switching from the digital cable to analog, and going back to a couple other monitors I have including the last one that worked fine. I'll get to it-but probably not for a couple days as I have a horrible work schedule. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/