hcornea

Just throwing another theory out there: Could it just be that this is some 'sensationalist news' for a fledgling FS Site and forum, that is trying to increase its' exposure and web-traffic. So far ... no-one can confirm that they cannot validate their FSX install (quite the opposite), and the anti-sense argument has been made quite clearly. Just saying ... if it smells like .... it might just be.

Why not try putting up a support query with the software developer at www.orbxsystems.com You will need to register, post in the validation thread, and provide your purchase details, but you can then get a solution from the horse's mouth (so to speak)

No. Can't say I would either. Can you post your ORBX forum name here, and someone can unlock whatever is blocking your account. There have been some major datacenter (er, problems) in the last 24 hours, so possible you fell victim to those. Scratch that. Found you. Will get the account reset.

Just to add to J van E's post above. You do not need to purchase a product to register on the ORBX forums. You DO need to follow all the validation instructions by posting a single post in the correct forum. Not overly complicated. The extra validation became necessary due to inundation with SPAM accounts. It's a once only process, but needs to be completed or the security scripts will invalidate the account after a preset period. For those interested in the thread on Mike's logging roads issue, it can be viewed here. http://orbxsystems.com/forum/index.php?/topic/19328-PNW-Logging-Roads And yes, you do need a validated logged in account to see the link.

Well spotted.

Would a product advertised at $5 more at one store when compared to another create the same angst. When viewing threads like this, I do wonder if people enjoy confecting outrage more than flightsimming itself. As has been said, the download period is stated, as are the TOU. If you don't agree then don't buy. If a $5 redownload service is not of use then don't pay it! Personally, i have not had issue with having to pay to redownload. It is de-rigeur (check product downloads on Digital River for general software) so railing against it is somewhat like complaining about inflation, income tax and mortgage interest rates. They exist. Exercise your consumer brain, and live with the consequences of your decision. This clncept is neatly encapsulated in the phrase 'Caveat emptor'

This statement defies all logic. The customer IS paying for it, either directly or as a surcharge. So either everyone pays more, and the company puts this toward the cost of those who lose/don't make backups. Alternatively, the company charges nothing to cover contingencies, and user-pays if you have to download again. I guess the former model works great with customers expecting the vendor to be an endless cloud server. The point is, if you don't download again, you are possibly subsidising everyone else who does! Both models are valid. They are just different.

Yep. Got that. Another cross-posting. I've asked one of the admins to unlock the bilworth account. They will need to see my request to act on it. Try again in the next day or so. It does not sound at all like you would have been banned. Haha. Cross post 3 Post in the validation thread if you can see it. If not I'd say you are all good.

Please ensure that you log in. Did you follow the validation instructions and make a single post in that thread? Need to know your ORBX username to be of any help. Ok got that (crossposting) Sounds like you might have missed the validation instructions. Will see if the account can be unlocked.

... Or that you should wear seatbelts in a car in case you crash. Crazy, right? Bicycle helmets are mandated by law in Australia. Sheez, it's not like RAM is that expensive nowadays.

Mitch, Find jon_aus recent thread on rock textures. This will explain how MipMaps work and give you a better understanding of what you see. And yes, a 1024 x 1024 DXT1 texture is approx 16x the size of a 256 x 256, for no benefit and much larger resource consumption (bloat)

Not sure there has been any history of the ATSB sweeping a commercial airliner incident under the rug before. Probably the only issue has been criticism of CASA for either enforcing unduly or not enforcing issues. Perhaps someone could think of an example. And no, I don't think the NTSB, Boeing or FAA will be required, unless equipment failure is somehow implicated. Yes, there are definitely countries and regulatory bodies outside the USA. As to the original question, here is where the 'rug sweeping' will update, as the investigation progresses: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-100.aspx

No .. the point is to resample them all to 256 x 256, because the 1024 does not show !!! So ... texture upgrade: YES. Better than default. HD textures: sadly NO, they are not! A tool like imagemagick might simplify all this for you, if you like CLI tools.

Google Chrome Version 27.0.1453.110 m W7x64 Professional Edit Post --> Submits Post (can see it after a page reload), but doesn't return to the page. One the 'other' board I use, running current IPB, the edit function apparently works normally.

The colour balance is probably an artefact from the tool used to convert the images. As for resolution, I cant see a difference myself. I think the 1024 textures are maxing out at the second level Mip (256x256) .. so you have probably just discovered a performance boost