bandman

How do you figure it's misplaced? If you mean that you think the building shouldn't be there you are incorrect. In the real world their is a building in Brooklyn with a sloped roof owned by Citibank. It was located to line up with their similarily designed HQ in Manhattan.

All three with Carenado planes and Tongass Fjord X

Monitor proliferation wil help maintain the importance of desktops. I have a co-worker who has 8 monitors and every time I go by his office he seems to add another one. I have two and many other of my colleagues have 3.

Jim in fact implied that pictures alone where not enough to make any claim; presumably even by him. If Jim said something more along the lines as you suggest it would have been a much more civil way to counter any speculation. Facts and logic are always a better argument than calling people names and it would actually contribute to the conversation rather than detract. I do not see speculating based on limited information as narrow minded. In the end it hurts no one to speculate on what Flight might be based on the available information. If you look at anything that people are passionate about, i.e. take any particular sport, people will read a great deal into any little data point. The phenomenon is not restricted to this particular forum either. Look at any forum regarding any particular piece of hardware or software under development and you will see the exact same thing. Being narrow minded means holding on to a particular belief no matter the facts presented. What is happening here in this forum does not fit that definition.

I wonder why someone who is trying to help sell a product is being publicly critical of people who are the company's core target market and calling them names. I'm a big fan of HiFi products and think you guys have great customer service but you are cetainly generating negative goodwill for the company with some of your recent comments on the Fligh forum.

Yes. I can tell by looking that my FSX with ASE looks better than the weather in these pictures.

Still, its not much of an improvement over FSX with ASE. It looks like the clouds are still the same FSX 2D spinning puffballs that disappear when you fly into them.

I'd pay $500 no problem if it was a meaningful enough upgrade. Thus far however from the website I can't see how Prepar3D is that much different from FSX. Can you give us some more info on it Tim as to what the improvements are or will be? Addendum: never mind I found it here http://www.prepar3d....ient/#landclass. Looks like those spinning 2D clouds are still around.

Now that sounds like something to get behind. At least from looking at the Perpar3D web page it doesn't look like it's much beyond FSX but if it gets your stamp of approval John then it must be good. Maybe we should get a Prepar3D Forum up and running. That way we could start the process of speculating and making requests all over again! (Joking of course).

What I mean is that FSX is alive today as a relevant platform because of the payware upgrades. I doubt Microsoft sold very many copies of FSX this year. The casual buyers were gone long ago. On average there is only a window of about 6 months after a game title is released to take in the lion share of revenues. No I don't but the only reason there are six pages so far on this thread is because we have no information otherwise. This is simply an aftereffect of the cause. Any marketer worth their salary today would be telling a client that they need to engage with those customers who are most enthusiastic about their product: hence the rise of Twitter and Facebook as an advertising platform. The ACES team understood this a lot better. However, thus far with Flight, the MSFT approach is to do almost the exact opposite.

Microsoft has a history of abandoning products on a whim without consideration of customer goodwill. Especially with MSFS it would be very easy to cut as it is meaningless for the company as a source of revenue or profit. From a business prospective it’s hard to comprehend why they actually bothered to turn the lights back on. Bill Gates bought the flight sim franchise because he was, to some extent long ago, an enthusiast. However as he is less involved with day to day operations now he isn’t likely to step in to protect it. At least with X-Plane it is run by someone who is an FS enthusiast and X-Plane is (presumably) 100% of the company’s revenues. So Austin et al will be much more dedicated to keeping the franchise alive and relevant. So I think MSFT would actually be doing the hardcore FSers a favor by getting out of the market altogether. As it is they are hampering innovation by hanging this sword of Damocles over everyone that is Flight. I mean look at what it’s like right now. Counter to every modern marketing strategy they have almost zero engagement with the people who are the product’s true brand ambassadors. Is it cancelled? Isn’t it? No one really knows because MSFT is a thoughtless, godless bureaucratic monolith (okay I’m embellishing a bit). I don’t think they could do a better job pissing everyone off if they actually tried. It’s the payware guys that keep MSFS alive. Without them I as well as I’m sure many others would have abandoned MSFS years ago. XP10, or any other future alternative, in and of itself isn’t going to make me switch. What will make me switch is the day the truly innovative developers like Orbx, PMDG or A2A say that there is a better platform and that they will start making add-ons for it.

Since you are in communication with Carenado, if you can, I'd love to hear any insight you have on why Carenado maintains such limited interaction with the community and almost never responds to customer feedback or questions. For example, I fail to see why they won't issue a SP with your fixes to the flight dynamics. Seems like a no brainer to me.Most developers are pretty active in the community and interact regularly on the forums. With Carenado the communication is mostly one way.

I hope Carenado is paying you to fix their product.Why not put the file here on Avsim as well? Personally I never use Sim-Outhouse either, though I have an account.

Ideally you would want to have an integrated scenery package like Orbx that includes everything - custom landclass, mesh, etc. Buying stand alone mesh products you have to be careful. Although moutains look better they can get really messed up around airports and coastlines. Looks like FS Global includes a tool to fix airport elevations though. Also no matter the mesh product I've always been able to find errors in the elevation that leave artifacts. But I have yet to find any meaningful errors with the mesh data in Orbx products. I find that with mesh products the negatives outweight the positives. I was told FS Genesis is supposed to be working on a solution for the airport elevation problem but I don't know if a fix has made it to commercial launch yet.I live on the east coast of the US and I've found that the various scenery options discussed here are not very satisfying. At this point I'm just going to wait until Orbx get around to my area of the world and buy that. You would probably have to wait considerably longer than me until Orbx gets around to India however.

I've given X-Plane a few different tries. I just couldn't stand it. The UI was horrible. Other than that though right out of the box X-Plane maybe a better simulator than FSX. But with all of the scenery and aircraft add-ons that are available for FSX there is really no comparison between the two.The day after Orbx, A2A, RealAir and PMDG all get on board with X-Plane is the day I switch.The only developer that I regularly buy from that has been willing to support X-Plane is Carenado. But then Carenado is not necessarily know as an innovator in terms of flight dynamics. I just buy from them because the developers building more complex models don't seem to be too interested in making the more common GA right now. I'm still waiting for a good C172 that has more advanced features such as more realistic spin and stall characteristics, visible icing and cumulative damage modelling. With the majority of the flight schools still using C172s it seems like there should also be a real commercial market for something like this.