jackcnd

>I too bought FSX and I too was extremely disappointed at the>performance...>My opinions are my own...Mine too, well said Larry.A group of us fly together and have gone back to FS-9. FS-X may look better in a few specific areas, but for general use its 2nd best. Last time when FS-X turned its BLUR mode on, I said enough of this nonsense. I'd rate the thing as 2/10 . I just don't understand MS of late. All the money, time and talent with so many TOP beta testers willing to help produce a great app, and we end up with 7fps on top end PC's. Had planned on a new PC and Vista when its released, no more. Between the FS-X saga and previously watching Vista RC-1 do hard crashes about once every couple hours, WinXP is here to stay.

I have a few here, FS-X default mesh is quite good in US and Canada.http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/fsx

>If I take my $37.99 South to Canada (yep, from Detroit) can>you guarantee that it will buy the same amount of casino chips>everyday?>I think the point is the currency converter is on the site.A refund of a couple euros would have resulted in a happy customer, which surely would have been a fair price to avoid this thread?Companies that rely on fine print are not ones I go back to.A Canadian posting a $1.15 exchange rate would honor it, even in the Casino :)

I agree that SimMarket should have refunded the difference.If there own currency tool showed $37.99US, either drop the currency tool or live with its prices.One unhappy customer like this can cost more than a couple euros when they post on avsim...

Great to see the developers posting blogs from the FS team.The "Plugging Along" entry by tdragger does not sit well?It suggests how impressed Bill Gates was with an FS-X demo.I hope he also contacts the help desk for feedback or takes a look at avsim.I rather see MS take some responsibility here and acknowledge the weaknesses and pledge to correct them as opposed to flying the all is well flag.

>The new sim is very disapointing. ...>>Would have been nice if the MS folks had noticed the trend>towards dual cores and written code that would have taken>advantage of the horsepower. >>Colin>PortlandAgreed, we should not have to replace files, recompile textures, add config lines etc. This is not what one should expect from a company with the resources of Microsoft and the time since the last FS release.I sense from the comments from beta testers and developers that the problems stem from management. At least they have a exceptional return policy.

We might have a collectors item, some one posted a "FS-X Recalled" thread.Microsoft's US/Canada return policy is 2nd to none.I hope they learn from the FS-X comments being made. With the new dual core SLI systems available today, no excuse for the often very poor frames rates in FS-X. Not to mention the glaring bugs like listing a Red Gold C172 that does not exist. Even those of us that choose to keep it should be offered a rebate.

Maybe those unhappy will keep it, thinking a better PC may make it more playable someday?Is nice to see MS does offer a 45 day return period.

>Did anyone hear anything about a fix for this yet ?Did you read the link above from the MS FS-X developer, stating the 'Fix' is it to change the name to White C172.I would have hoped they could have posted a Red Gold texture too, given the bad press FS-X is getting it might have helped...

Interesting, despite the many complaints seems no one is planning to return FS-X?

Anyone decided to return FS-X , seems MS offers a full refund within 45 days?http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/productrefund/refund.asp

>Driver 91.47 WHQL released in September...>>Updated October 17, 2006: Updated driver to include NVIDIA SLI>profiles for Battlefield 2142, Company of Heroes, and Flight>Sim X.>Thinking of a new card, so what benefit does SLI offer FS-X now?

>>In FSX the FSG mesh is 9.6m in the US and 19m in Canada.:-) That sounds great but I just dont see that much more detail but I do see the sunken features?Maybe someone else can try this screenshot at Lake Louise,Alberta,Canada to check the settings...http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/image/68141955/original.jpg

Depends where you fly. In Canada, I didn't notice much difference and had some issues with sunken airports.With FS9 FSG mesh highly recommended, but not sure with FS-X. Ultimate terrain made a bigger difference for me.I have a few of compares here:http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/fsxIf you find any better compares or settings to bring out the detail please post...

Thinking of upgrading the PC for FSX, while framerate may not increase with a new CPU, is it now possible to have 2 or more monitors working with 3D acceleration?Example: Be able to run FSX on one monitor linked to Google Earth on the other. Right now I have a dual head X850 but it only supports DirectX on the main monitor.I've read of new MBs being able to have mulitple GPUs now but does XP support directX on multiple monitors?

I've been using MyFSGoogleEarth the WideFS to run google earth on my laptop linked to the main FS2004 system. Love watching GE update as I fly.Anyway to do this with FSX?http://www.elbiah.de/flusi/MyFsGoogleEarth...GoogleEarth.htm

I would not recommend FS-X to anyone as the first flight sim. FS9 + addons is a better place to start.Depends on your expectations and what you have now...If you don't have FS9 or just have FS9 standalone, then I'd say don't buy FS-X. Buy FS-9 discounted and add a specific package like Vancouver+ . You'll get great frame rates and it will amaze in the areas covered by the addon software. Or add general packages like FS Genesis mesh and UT Canada /USA / Europe.If you have FS9 with addons now, then FS-X is appealing, but dont uninstall FS9+.

I agree with Bill too.FS-X is just disappointing too often. Sure I could find some area and plane combos where framerate is fine, but those are the exception. To suggest its better if you recompile textures, update config files and turn off options seems proof of a poorly planned product?The FS-9 experience with addons exceeds FS-X.FS-X could have been :+ 38m-76m world wide mesh where available+ Accurate Landclass + Accurate shoreline, river and major roads+ Accurate placement of airports+ Option for moving cars on roads+ Option for ground airport trucks+ MissionsThose improvements would have had little impact on frame rate, offered a much better out of box simulator for everyone. FS-X as delivered is CPU limited, and in the next 2 years the best most users will own is a 4Ghz dual core with a DX10 video card, and that will not solve 6fps FS-X frame rate issues.

No way FS-X is a replacement for FS9 + addons.FS-X has some nice features, night flying, mountain flying, detailed VC, etc, but frame rate is very unacceptable too often. Its no replacement for FS9 plus a decent package like Vancouver + or FSG Mesh and UT Canada / USA.FS9 + addons = sharp 1920x1200 with solid 25-40 fps+, with settings maxed out.FS-X = 1280x1024 often blurry with frame rates under 10 just too oftenI think most sim fans will want to buy it and use it where its best, but its no replacement for FS9+ and I dont see that changing for a long time.

Yes, and it should run better to since its off the main drive that needs to access the VM, etc.

The 'fix' is to call it a White Cessna. Thanks, I guess... :)http://blogs.technet.com/p-12c_pilot/archi...red-cessna.aspx

Nice setup!I didn't like the thought of using reduced textures, figured I have FS9 for that but your comments are interesting.Any chance you could post a few screenshots with Lat / Long etc, so we can compare our results at the same location ?

>After doing some comparing flights in FSX I must conclude>this. FSX can't compete with my FS9 + its addons...Agreed, FS-X is 2nd best to a decent FS-9 setup.I used FS-X deluxe for a few days, its new and neat at first, butthen going back to FS-9 with FS Genesis mesh, Ulimate Terrain and GE its clear the older product with addon's is better, mostly due to frame rates.Whats the point of all the new detailed textures if the frame rate is poor.

>Hi>is there somewhere i can turn these Off???I don't like these>at all.Not moaning ,just a preference of mine.i know they look>realistic,personally i would rather have had the VC Rain>effects instead.> thanks> steveAgreed, very annoying, need a switch or a cfg change quick!

>has anyone been able to get those texture problems fixed ??Not heard of a fix, Maybe the MS developers here, tdragger, etc, could reply on this issue. Maybe post a quick DL fix?