Is anyone presently running Fly II under OS 10.3 and if so how is it performing?Thanks in advance,Mike G.

Hi Mike,It runs OK except that FlyII doesn't recognise the joystick, (which is a bit of a problem!) even though under Panther it was OK using a Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.I intend to purchase a Firewire external HD and install Panther on that and when I wish to use FlyII boot from that disk. As yet I haven't done anything about it but I will let you know how I get on.Paul

Paul,OS 10.3 is Panther. Do you mean that Fly II ran OK under OS 10.2.6 which is Jaguar?Mike G.

Sorry Mike you are right it is 10.2, not sure about the last number (the computer was stolen in a burglary at my house so I cannot check)On the replacement computer (a G5 dual 1.8) running 10.3 FlyII runs OK apart from no joystick, but good framerates etc.Paul

Paul, Thanks for the information. I am currently running Fly II under OS 10.1.2 but need to up grade to at least 10.2 for some new software that I want to install. Your information makes me think that I should try and find a copy of 10.2 Jaguar instead of 10.3 Panther and install that instead. I could also do what you are considering, using an external drive or partition the hard drive and install both versions. I will have to check with Mac Tech support and Logitech about future joystick compatibilty with the new operating systems. People at the Mac store have no answer. One more question. How would you compare the frame rate on your new G5 to your old computer for Fly II?Mike G.

I have the Jaguar joystick issue, too. To use Fly! with the Saitek, I have to boot into OS9. To be fair, I haven't tried USN OverDrive as some have suggested--no time!

Hi Allan, Guys......hope your all well!I'm running 10.2.8 with FLYII and its just about flyable as long as you stay clear of airport 3d scenery (about 1 frame every 10 seconds!).I must say I'm getting a bit fed up with it now though. Ive noticed things are a bit quite around here lately, have people basically given up on FLYII??Does anyone know the cause of the drastic frame rates in FLYII?Why was FLY2k so playable yet FLYII is'nt??Finally if anyone is still using FLYII and is prepared to do some testing, can you please let me know!Thanks GuysRegards John

John,More details on the type of testing that you have in mind. I am willing to help if I can, I have the time.Mike G.

Hi Mike,As you may or may not be aware, Development in FLY is very time consuming. Consequently I've decided to try and get my projects in a usable state so at least you guys can get some enjoyment from them (Hopefully).And I'll add to them as time goes on. Basically I'm looking for someone who is reasonablly familiar with FLY's system files and is running a compatable mac system to myself.Ive attached a picture of the MD83 which has been textured from scratch and I'll post a panel shot shortly.Just to recap Mike.......... what I'm after is someone I can rely on to play around with the aircraft and report back to me on any modifcation they may think appropriate, as this will free up a hugh amount of time for me to proceed with the development.Thanks for your TimeRegardsJohn

Hi Paul.............Long time no hear!!............how are you doing!I did'nt realize you was a MAC guy. I thought you were running PC??Good to hear from you.Regards John

Hi John and Mike,I run both Mac (G5 1.8) and a Home built PC.I have had a few health problems recently but I would be happy to assist you in any way that I can.Mike I have found the frame rates quite good up in the mid 30s but the colour appears to be not quite right but the ini file is probably wrong and needs tweaking. I suspect that the old G4 was a Radeon card and the new G5 is a nVidia so will require a different ini file.Paul

John asked, "Does anyone know the cause of the drastic frame rates in FLYII? Why was FLY2k so playable yet FLYII isn't??John, as I remember, the difference in performance was largely due to Fly 1/2K having a proprietary video engine and Fly! II using OpenGL. There are OpenGL issues that TRI never really resolved. Example: mixed 2D and 3D graphic in the same view (i.e., cockpit view) gave Fly II problems.The Fly II aircraft also use many more polygons than Fly 1/2K. I can't remember the exact numbers, but I recall thinking that the Fly II Skyhawk showed polygon usage something like 3-4x that of the 1/2K Skyhawk.Rich said that front side bus speed was a big hitter on Mac performance. At the time of his passing, the fastest Mac bus was 167mHz. If he was correct, then rates on a G5 should be very good indeed.The thing that always concerned me was the I--with the slowest computer among the beta testers--saw rates only slightly worse that the guys with the really fast Macs. That's just weird.A

Hi Allan,Thanks for that!Something else whats pretty weird is the difference in MacOS 9.2 and MacOSX.Under 9.2 FlyII was quite reasonable in the 3d scenery areas, where as in 'X' its pretty un playable. I guess there is'nt going to be any wonder fix for this!!Speak to you againcheers John

Hi, all.It's been a long time!My recollection regarding the reason for slow frame rates is the same as Allan's. I also remember reading that results on last year's G5 PowerMacs were much better than on any G4 or earlier Mac.I rarely run Fly! these days, mostly because of the poor performance and limited yoke functionality. I haven't gotten a G5, partly because I need Virtual PC and partly because I want to see Apple do another iteration of internal architecture. I still have the dual 800 that was the fastest Mac only 3 years ago. :) It's fine for most stuff that I do, but I've gotten into digital photography in a big way and it's showing its age.-Franklin------------------------------Franklin TesslerDP 800Fly! for Mac Co-moderator