I am posting to get an idea as to which operating system seems to work "better" for folks running Fly II... MacOS 9 or Jaguar?---John R. SippyChicago, IL, USAPowerMacG4 -Dual 5001024MB RAMnVidiaGF2 - 32MB

John,My only experience is a quick test on my daughter's eMac 700 (384MB RAM, onboard nVidea 32MB, OS10.2).Booting into OS9 was clearly the winner on that machine. Best rates I ever saw -- around 25 fps external view with the Flyhawk over generic scenery, and aorund 15 in the cockpit with panel on.Rates under Jag were worse than the machine in my sig before I upgrraded the processor from 300 to 500nHz.I'm beginning to wonder if it's related to the nVidea cards. Has anybody run FlyII under Jag with an ATI 8500 card??

All,I run on Jaguar with a pretty decent machine- 867 dual processor, with the Nvidea GeForce4 ti (128mb) card. My frame rates are poor at best while near the ground/airport, though they are acceptable once in the air. 25fps takoff/landing without buildings, only the top line of guages visible in the Flyhawk. Add buildings and forget about it. I think it may also have something to do with the Nvidea card/drivers. I plan to try the new ATI 9700 when its released and I'll report if there's any improvement.Joel

I agree with Joel. OS 9 is the way to go with Fly! II, although you can get acceptable rates under Jag, especially off the ground. -Franklin------------------------------Franklin TesslerDP 800Fly! for Mac Co-moderator

I can't compare but I can confirm that with OS9 I'm getting about 25 fps in the air and 15fps within the cockpit with an ATI RADEON card and a G4 400. Eventhough the frame rates are low compared to the PC's, my brother-in-law who's on a PC thought that the frame rates were very smooth in comparison to his equivalent system.I do use a minimal extension set while using FLY! II which makes a HUGE difference.Peter

Well,Since first typing up the original post here, I have reinstalled Fly!2 and of course patched it to 240. Running under Jag 10.2.4 on the Mac listed in my sig, Ive been getting around 10 fps on the ground at CGX (chicago) in the skyhawk (with full panel) sometimes dipping to 6 or 7. In the air rates have been smooth and between 15 and 25. I am running fly!2 with the 32 meg no hires detail option set, as well as no dynamic traffic, but I do have Jure's big clouds installed.I havent really had a chance to check it out in 9 yet, but from what you are all saying here, it looks like it should run great.Overall, I am pleased with the performance in Jaguar, while not stellar I am able to get in some decent flying without rebooting---John R. SippyChicago, IL, USAPowerMacG4 -Dual 5001024MB RAMnVidiaGF2 - 32MB

"...OS 9 is the way to go with Fly! II..."I am not sure. I have OS X 10.1.5 and I get better frame rates in X 10.1.5 then 9.2. In 9, If I sart at the PAQ airport in Alaska ( Very nice mountains! Love flying there! ) and swivel the camera in the spot view too fast, My computer crashes. And I have a 800mg G4 with a 32mg Geforce2 Mx. I would be able to tell you my exact frame rate comparison but my Fly! II is down right now. I hope this helps, even though I don't have Jaguar !

That's interesting, because I've never gotten better frame rates with any version of OS X. What concerns me most is that at some point, there'll be a version of OS X that doesn't run Fly!, even with the patch. I already have issues with 10.2.4, so who knows what 10.2.5 will do, not to mention 10.3 in the fall? However, any Mac that runs Fly! under OS 9 now will continue to do so.-Franklin------------------------------Franklin TesslerDP 800Fly! for Mac Co-moderator

I can't help thinking that there is some interaction (or lack thereof) between Fly II and nVidea Mac cards. I sure hope someone reads this who's running a newer Mac with a newer ATI card (ex., 8500).