FSX and Vista

[Guest PowderBlue]

Whats the scoop on FSX and DX10 and Vista, is it worth it for me to switch to vista? Does FSX run better on Vista? Doesn't Vista take up alot more memory? And does FSX use DX10 yet? Thanks alot for the help

[aerdt 0]

Worth to switch to Vista? No.Does FSX run better on Vista? No.Does Vista take up a lot more memory? Yes.Does FSX use DX10? Yes (with Acceleration add-on), but it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Not visually, and very marginally performance-wise. It is merely a "DX10 Preview" that ACES/MS has released to make FSX DX10-compatible to fulfill some promises. The only visual improvements are "cockpit shadows" and a lot of users have reported decreased/no stutters. Worth getting it? Right now, definitely not.Hope this helps,Pat

[PhilTaylor 45]

Pat, at least be accurate when you post criticisms.http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007...on-and-sp2.aspx lists the 3 visual features in the FSX-DX10 update:1)VC cockpit shadows2)enhanced bloom using HDR techniques3)enhanced water rendering with whitecaps that react to weatheras well as the general fixes available to DX9 users and the fact that DX10 will be available in the free SP2 download later this year.

[soaring_penguin 428]

Please do not mix up Acceleration and SP2.The DX10 preview is part of SP2. SP2 is currently only available if you buy Acceleration and will be available as a free download in the near future. (only ACEs know when).If someone is not interested in the new missions and the 3 planes coming with Acceleration, just wait for this SP2 download.Also the feelings about SP2 are mixed, some have it running without problems and even get a slight improvement (I am one of the lucky ones), others are going through a lot of problems and performance loss.The jury is still out about the cause. If you are going to buy a new PC, don't be afraid of Vista, it is a great OS (my opinion) and maturing much faster then XP did. And go immediately 64 bits. All my hardware and software (ok, there are some exceptions) are working.If you have a pc with XP, no need to upgrade to Vista, spent the money on something like GEX and/or FEX :-)Again, SP2 download with a lot of fixes for both DX9 and DX10 will be available as a free download soon. JanPS this is not to bash Acceleration, I bought it myself and I am enjoying it a lot. If you are into missions, and/or like the 3 new aircraft, you simply have to buy it.PPS should this be pinned to the top ?

[Guest DreamFleet]

Let me also say that MS expects most 3rd party developers to follow the DX9 path for FSX. They have stated this in public too.The fact that you have FSX and a "preview" of DX10 should not lead you to believe that we will all be producing products for DX10, as we believe that will be mostly for FS11.Now, as to those of you have have mixed opinions about SP2, what are we developers to do?As it is we have to deal with XP, Vista, FS9, FSX, DX9, SP1, SP2, and at least where I am concerned we'll ignore DX10 for now, sorry.And some of you folks wonder why there are not all that many add-ons for FSX?Where am I coming from when it comes to FSX and porting our products into it? It will be SP2 and DX9 along with dealing with XP and Vista.Just one developer's perspective on this scenario.Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...R_FORUM_LOU.jpg

[scott967 62]

Thanks Lou -- if it's bad for major developers, just think about the hobbyist developer's problems.scott s..

[soaring_penguin 428]

I think it all comes down to choices.For my part, no new airplanes, unless they are confirmed working with DX10. But correct me if I am wrong, shouldn't planes created with the FSX SDK be DX10 compatible ? And are most third party planes not created first for FS9 and then exported/adapted to work under FSX ?But I fully understand your (developers) concern, as the user base for FS9 is still important, if not more important then the FSX user base. Jan

[Guest PowderBlue]

Thats what makes me feel as if the sim community is going in the wrong direction. We are not doing it on purpose but what is the point for developers of add ons when the customer eventually buys DX10 stuff DX9 Only , FSX only , FS9 Only and this being a repetitive scenario every couple of years. With a major part of our community being young adults and kids who can only afford the 1 great add-on they wait for others like me spend probably a thousand or more just to make my sim the best it can be with the least amount of hassle. But how long can this cycle continue before all of this wears thin. Theres not to much we can do right now, but I think with all the software and hardware that is changing I don't think were gonna see the absolute stunning sim that we wish for , for quite sometime.

[soaring_penguin 428]

As I said before, it all comes down to choices. MSFS has never been the same for two users. I admit, in the beginning (FS4) I did do fly big jets occasionally, but since FU III I am hooked on low and slow, enjoying the flying by hand and not on instruments.I find I am enjoying the missions even more, especially the bush pilot style of missions. I also highly appreciate the sailplane capabilities of FSX. So for me the most important is the environment (clouds, ground textures, water, ...).Others prefer long hauls with passenger jets. For them, the most important is accurate procedures and instrumentation.Still others prefer realistic AI traffic and airports.All those scenarios have there own add-ons targeted to the specific taste of the user.Is it not wonderfull that all those different kinds of - I will call it gameplay, are possible in this one software title ?Jan