FSDreamTeam forum
Developer's Backdoor => Los Angeles LAX Backdoor => Topic started by: virtuali on August 13, 2011, 01:38:20 pm
-
Just a single shot to get you an idea of the scenery looks, I've uploaded in .PNG, so the quality won't be affected by compression.
The screenshot is absolutely unaltered, undoctored, unprocessed, not sharpen or edited in any way (other than adding the caption), it's exactly as it looks like for real, and everything else it's 100% default, no dramatic addon cloud effects, nothing. Just the scenery.
-
Good job! It looks amazing and I am looking forward to have it installed on my FSX.
-
Good job! It looks amazing and I am looking forward to have it installed on my FS9.
-
Good job! It looks amazing and I am looking forward to have it installed on my FS9.
Don't expect *that* quality on FS9, though...texture resolution will be down from 4096x4096 to 1024x1024, and no specular reflections, not bump mapping which would result in flatter and less sharpen ground. The issue is, those advanced materials are *everywhere* on KLAX so, it will be the scenery were the difference between FS9 and FSX will be more dramatic.
Assuming there WILL be an FS9 version to begin with. We are still not 100% sure, since we still haven't seen it on FS9 yet.
-
Looks outstanding, terrific work and should be the perfect compliment to the NGX. JFK-LAX, LAX-LAS, LAX-FLL, LAX-ORD. You guys have it all covered. 8)
-
Love it I am sure glad I upgraded to FSX the only downside I see is now the city of LA and the surrounding area is well blah looking :). Great job looking forward to LAX.
Sean
-
Love it I am sure glad I upgraded to FSX the only downside I see is now the city of LA and the surrounding area is well blah looking Smiley. Great job looking forward to LAX.
Get Megascenery Socal...
-
Assuming there WILL be an FS9 version to begin with. We are still not 100% sure, since we still haven't seen it on FS9 yet.
(http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Praying.gif)(http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Praying.gif) (http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Praying.gif)(http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Praying.gif)
I would still be very interested in getting it with the lowered quality.
-
Wow looks awesome. I hope release is soon because I want my hands on it!
But too bad my performance in the NGX isn't good enough to fly it there (or any addon airport/any airport at all...) :-\. I will have to upgrade my computer.
-
Fantastic!
Looks very impressive...
-
I do beleive LAX is turning out to be the greatest one of all. :)
-
Oh Dear god have mercy on us!!!
-
Hi Umberto,
really fantastic shot/scenery! As always the best sceneries around the world, I hope for a soon release on the market... FSDT KLAX will be my new one. Thanks. Bye.
Riccardo
-
Looks nice. About fs9's version, in case you decide one day to port that scenery, you *could* let the specular without too much trouble, even older fs9 sceneries have that feature, like ancient Simwings' LFPG or even Overland's Seoul Incheon. Old sceneries, old techniques, yet specular was there already. Just my two cents.
-
Old sceneries, old techniques, yet specular was there already.
But the technology isn't. A lot of this is done with SimConnect and Python, which don't work in FS9.
-
Old sceneries, old techniques, yet specular was there already. Just my two cents.
Specular effects alone were supported by FS9, however it was way more limited, because you had to define a material using a specular value. With FSX, there's specular mapping instead, were the values are taken from a separate bitmap (different from the main texture), so you can specify different values for each pixel, if needed. There's no comparison.
And, FSX has bump mapping, which FS9 doesn't have, and this is what gives the most tridimensional effect to objects, which can't be really captured by screenshots, because it changes with the viewpoint and the light angle.
And, FSX has environment mapping, which FS9 doesn't have, that allows to see reflections. KLAX use it extensively, especially in the new TBIT terminal, which is mainly metal+glass. And we use custom environment mapping so, it's not the default "bush" environment that is used, but it's a map of the actual scenery itself, which is reflected in the glass.
In KLAX, we used all these features extensively, and combined, that's why it will be very difficult to make it for FS9, because the whole modeling *started* having these features in mind.
See in the attached screenshot, always keeping in mind a static image really doesn't capture the effect.
-
Another example, here. Note how close the viewpoint is to the building, usually you would see extreme blurriness at this distance, but here is still very sharp, because even the detail texture has his own custom bump map.
-
WOW KLAX looks really awesome! very very very good work FsDt!
-
When will you let us know if your doing FS9 or not?
-
I would like nobody would take this in the wrong way, because it's not meant to be a bashing of other developers in any way, I would like to be as objective as possible.
Here's two screenshots of a similar situation (viewpoint very close to a building with concrete wall+glass), from some of the best developers of large airports out there: FlyTampa's Athens and Flightbeam's KSFO.
They both look *very* good from a distance, but when you get close, there's no comparison with KLAX.
FlyTampa used a very FS9-compatible method, just diffuse mapping + alpha for transparencies, both things that FS9 can do just as well as FSX. The best idea here is the use of baked shadows and Ambient Occlusions to give depth without costing anything to the fps. We use that method at KLAX extensively too, the whole scenery use AO. However, there's no bump mapping, so the scenery is a bit flat and doesn't change much with time of day or viewpoint, but what really ruined the otherwise very nice detailed shadows, is the DXT compression, which created a lot of pixelization artifacts. In any case, it's a scenery that will probably look the same even in FS9, at least in this place.
Flghtbeam KSFO is a bit better. First, there is bump mapping, although being on the main texture, it follows its limited resolution, so it's not as sharp as KLAX, were we used it on the much high res detail texture. Amir was very smart here, because he chose a combination of colors and a way of painting that won't suffer as much when compressing in DXT so, there are not many visual artifacts as in the FlyTampa scenery, that has lots of high-frequency detail and sudden changes of nearby colors, and those don't compress very well.
In both cases, we are comparing to the developers we respect the most, but I'd say KLAX is really a big step forward in visual quality, with the side effect it won't convert very good in FS9.
-
When will you let us know if your doing FS9 or not?
After the FSX version is released, we'll start working on FS9, and decide after seeing the results. This time, we'll release FSX first, because the conversion to FS9 is not simple at all.
-
Sounds like KLAX is close to the finish line. :)
-
When will you let us know if your doing FS9 or not?
After the FSX version is released, we'll start working on FS9, and decide after seeing the results. This time, we'll release FSX first, because the conversion to FS9 is not simple at all.
Man that sucks :-[ One can hope...
-
When you consider the low cost of a 2500K, motherboard, and ram, I'm surprised that there are still FS9 users. FSX is SO worth the upgrade. KLAX should motivate some to make the change. Looks amazing!
-
When you consider the low cost of a 2500K, motherboard, and ram, I'm surprised that there are still FS9 users. FSX is SO worth the upgrade. KLAX should motivate some to make the change. Looks amazing!
Dude, U have no idea what U are saying... I have been flowing FS) since 05 and have spend lot of money on this product. Why on earth should I start all over now? when MS flight is right around the corner.
If FSDT won't make a FS9 version of LAX, they will lose me. :(
-
When will you let us know if your doing FS9 or not?
After the FSX version is released, we'll start working on FS9, and decide after seeing the results. This time, we'll release FSX first, because the conversion to FS9 is not simple at all.
Man that sucks :-[ One can hope...
Keep our fingers crossed. (http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Praying.gif)
When you consider the low cost of a 2500K, motherboard, and ram, I'm surprised that there are still FS9 users. FSX is SO worth the upgrade. KLAX should motivate some to make the change. Looks amazing!
Depends what one considers low cost ;) I've got waaay too many addons for FS9 to give it up. It looks just as good as FSX a lot of the time. Also, making very little money, I can't afford a few hundred on a computer. Gas + School + Insurance + Food + RW Flying = Busting open the piggy bank! :-\ Maybe someday I'll upgrade to FSX, but I just can't do it anytime soon.
-
If FSDT won't make a FS9 version of LAX, they will lose me.
They will lose you anyway. Umberto has already said if they did an FS9 version, it would be the last.
-
If FSDT won't make a FS9 version of LAX, they will lose me.
They will lose you anyway. Umberto has already said if they did an FS9 version, it would be the last.
True... Then I have to stick to Europe then ;) there are lots of fs9 airports... But I love flying in US :( so sad..
-
Well keep this in mind. There are some very crazy minded people who bought Buleprint LAX. So Even though it's clear the FS9 version of FSDT's LAX wont be as good as FSX, it will still be very good. And the FS9 Athens by FT is exactly the quality us FS9ners expect. We arn't really looking for this super bump maping the FSX version has. Im not saying it aint awesome, but our expectations from FS9 is perfomance over beauty and the quality of payware airports coming form FSDT, Aerosoft, Fly Tampa, UK2000, ImagineSim, Overland, and even Latin VFR and Eiresim just to name a few have been very beautiful for us indeed!
As you said before, if it at least looks as good as the C9 LAX then you will do it. Well that old C9 LAX still looks DAMN good to us. I happen to REALLY like the shading method of FlyTampa. Besides, the average FS9ner will still get twice the frames then the average FSX user in the same scenery. And for you other FS9 bashers, do understand performance is the not the reason most of us have stuck with FS9. My system got up to 30FPS with all FSX features maxed using PMDG 744 at JFK. It's the look and feel of FSX I don't like. It just feels like a game to me. Even the real life motion simulators such as CAE don't have gaphics and textures like FSX. They are more similar to FS9. And yes, I have flown in them with video to prove it.
I love that you are pushing the ladder with quality in flight simualtion Umberto. I do. But for me, FSX is just too gameish. So we hope you will be able to give us a good looking LAX for FS9 because if Flight turns out to be another game like platform, i'll skip that too. Besides, people like have so much to choose from between scenery and aircraft in FS9, we honestly can keep this up for years. Honestly, most of us with jobs, school, and family are lucky to get in a few hours a week if that and FS9 supplies the need very well...
-
This is the holy of the airports!!!!!!!! Please send it down soon, before school starts!!!!! (Sept 8.)
-
...I love that you are pushing the ladder with quality in flight simualtion Umberto. I do. But for me, FSX is just too gameish. So we hope you will be able to give us a good looking LAX for FS9 because if Flight turns out to be another game like platform, i'll skip that too. Besides, people like have so much to choose from between scenery and aircraft in FS9, we honestly can keep this up for years. Honestly, most of us with jobs, school, and family are lucky to get in a few hours a week if that and FS9 supplies the need very well...
Couldn't say it better myself! (http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Applause.gif)
-
Look's awesome fsdt! loving the bump mapping and other effects. :)
-
...I love that you are pushing the ladder with quality in flight simualtion Umberto. I do. But for me, FSX is just too gameish. So we hope you will be able to give us a good looking LAX for FS9 because if Flight turns out to be another game like platform, i'll skip that too. Besides, people like have so much to choose from between scenery and aircraft in FS9, we honestly can keep this up for years. Honestly, most of us with jobs, school, and family are lucky to get in a few hours a week if that and FS9 supplies the need very well...
Couldn't say it better myself! (http://static.avsim.net/forum//public/style_emoticons/default/Applause.gif)
Well said...not bashing...I just agree.
-
"Dude, U have no idea what U are saying... I have been flowing FS) since 05 and have spend lot of money on this product. Why on earth should I start all over now? when MS flight is right around the corner.
If FSDT won't make a FS9 version of LAX, they will lose me." :(
If history is any indication, then you will have to start all over with Flight. If you don't have the system to run FSX, you probably don't have the system to run Flight. As for the I have no idea, I've been there and done that, so realistically, I know what it takes to make the transition from version to newer version.
This is all in fun. ;D
Jose
-
"Dude, U have no idea what U are saying... I have been flowing FS) since 05 and have spend lot of money on this product. Why on earth should I start all over now? when MS flight is right around the corner.
If FSDT won't make a FS9 version of LAX, they will lose me." :(
If history is any indication, then you will have to start all over with Flight. If you don't have the system to run FSX, you probably don't have the system to run Flight. As for the I have no idea, I've been there and done that, so realistically, I know what it takes to make the transition from version to newer version.
This is all in fun. ;D
Jose
Take a look at my spec and shut up >:( I can run fsx without any problems, but I won't. U better respect that, Sir. It' still a free world right?
-
Very interesting to see the comparison Umberto!
I hope we get a video of KLAX soon (if not release :D)
Regards
-
So Even though it's clear the FS9 version of FSDT's LAX wont be as good as FSX, it will still be very good. And the FS9 Athens by FT is exactly the quality us FS9ners expect.
You are missing the point, my comparison was made just to explain why KLAX for FSX is unique, and why it will be difficult to convert to FS9.
If we simply took out bump mapping and specular mapping, and convert it to FS9, the whole scenery will look like the roofs or the doors which I've labeled "FS9 style". Without even mentioning that, we raised the number of polygons so much, that we don't even know if the FS9 compiler will take them, or even if the FS9 exporter will export, and even if they would, we don't even know how FS9 would react with so many polygons throwed at it, it's really a shot in the dark.
It's the look and feel of FSX I don't like. It just feels like a game to me. Even the real life motion simulators such as CAE don't have gaphics and textures like FSX. They are more similar to FS9. And yes, I have flown in them with video to prove it.
FSX itself doesn't have any "game" look, unless you are referring to the style of the default scenery but, who use default scenery anyways ? The engine is more CAPABLE, the final look depends what developers do with it, you can obtain a gamey look or not, depending what the developer does, not how the sim is done.
About professional FFS scenery, they might be more or less outdated, but just because their update cycles are way slower than consumer hardware, you don't upgrade such expensive hardware just to get better textures, but they DO get better graphic eventually.
When I used to fly FFS at Alitalia, in late 90's, MS Flight sim 98 already used 3DFX accelerated and filtered textures, while the MD80 FFS used technology from the 80's without *any* texture mapping, with less than 256-colors flat polygons, but the newest A321 sim was already 2-3 generations better and had textures so, in a few years even professional FFS *will* look like FSX now, that wouldn't make them any less professional then they are because, as I've said, it's not what the engine can do that makes it gamey, it's how it's being used by those that creates the scenery.
-
To be honest i dont really care how lacking the FS9 version will be compared to the FSX version. As long as it doesnt scoop down to Blue Prints level ;D , I think that most FS9 users, myself included, will be thrilled with the scenery that you have created! ;).
-
Correct... But the bar is not the BluePrint scenery...
It's the old Cloud9 KLAX scenery... which to my knowledge is looking quite good... Will be exciting to see, how this new KLAX scenery will take out in FS9...
Although after reading Umberto's post, it will some job of porting it... If it even CAN be done...
-
True. You make a very good point. Back then Airbus was way ahead of the ball on that. Lets just hope the polygons will convert over... If they do, would the worst case senario be that you would have to retexture the entire airport?
-
"Dude, U have no idea what U are saying... I have been flowing FS) since 05 and have spend lot of money on this product. Why on earth should I start all over now? when MS flight is right around the corner.
If FSDT won't make a FS9 version of LAX, they will lose me." :(
If history is any indication, then you will have to start all over with Flight. If you don't have the system to run FSX, you probably don't have the system to run Flight. As for the I have no idea, I've been there and done that, so realistically, I know what it takes to make the transition from version to newer version.
This is all in fun. ;D
Jose
Take a look at my spec and shut up >:( I can run fsx without any problems, but I won't. U better respect that, Sir. It' still a free world right?
That's a great system you have. You're doing the judicious thing. Stick with FS9.
-
Correct... But the bar is not the BluePrint scenery...
It's the old Cloud9 KLAX scenery... which to my knowledge is looking quite good... Will be exciting to see, how this new KLAX scenery will take out in FS9...
Although after reading Umberto's post, it will some job of porting it... If it even CAN be done...
Well if worse comes worse then maybe they could update the cloud9 with the new TBIT terminal
-
Correct... But the bar is not the BluePrint scenery...
It's the old Cloud9 KLAX scenery... which to my knowledge is looking quite good... Will be exciting to see, how this new KLAX scenery will take out in FS9...
Although after reading Umberto's post, it will some job of porting it... If it even CAN be done...
Well if worse comes worse then maybe they could update the cloud9 with the new TBIT terminal
Yes and make it AES compatible
-
Well if worse comes worse then maybe they could update the cloud9 with the new TBIT terminal
That's out of the question, if we can't port to FS9 for any reason, the Cloud9 version will remain as it is now, and this was said right from the start, before work on the new scenery started.
-
My money is on FS2004 version as always.
-
I think the NGX is reason enough to move to FSX!
And flight will be utilizing multi core CPUs and GPUs much much better, I expect my computer so shine on MS flight!
-
I think the NGX is reason enough to move to FSX!
And flight will be utilizing multi core CPUs and GPUs much much better, I expect my computer so shine on MS flight!
Agreed! :)
Personally I think the PMDG 737NGX and EZCam is some of the reasons for moving... :D
Also, the hardware requirements is now coming down that much, so it's possible to run FSX with a computer for around $1.000.
-
The hardware requirements for FSX haven't changed, its the prices that are coming down. When prices come down, it usually means newer hardware is on the horizon and what you buy today will be obsolete tomorrow.
-
LOL - Don't know what the hell happend with my sentence there... :S
Of course, the requirements for FSX hasn't changed! :)
Thanks for clarifying, Bruce!
-
Well if worse comes worse then maybe they could update the cloud9 with the new TBIT terminal
That's out of the question, if we can't port to FS9 for any reason, the Cloud9 version will remain as it is now, and this was said right from the start, before work on the new scenery started.
Thats really disappointing. I wasn't around here when that was announced, so I had my hopes up. Just got to keep my fingers crossed that the FS9 version will work!
-
I'm really looking forward to the FS9 version, whatever it looks like I know it will be premium. I'm using FSX too but no reason for me to buy FSDT products anymore if I haven't got the chance to buy it for two Simulators.
-
The Cloud9 version has the same trial period, you should try it just in case. One of the designers now works for FSDT, so the quality is there even if it is rather outdated.
-
My money is on FS2004 version as always.
+1
-
Do we have a release dat yet?
-
Yo Musjo that tower is from my home town airport! U Danish? ;)
-
Yo Musjo that tower is from my home town airport! U Danish? ;)
Yup! As Danish (NO... not the cake!) as I can be! :)
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
I also own all FSDT sceneries....
Now, don't get me wrong Umberto, I love your sceneries and think they are the best on the market. I understand your explanations about the terrific FSX features of FSDT KLAX and the difference you explain between your sceneries and Fly Tampa or Flightbeam.
It will probably bring us a KLAX scenery like never seen before... But the question I raise is: are those details really important for 95% of the users?
I mean, by using those mega airports, we start at the gate, push-back, take-off, fly, land and go back to the gate. Do we really make attention to all those tiny details? We don't spend most of our time at the airport....
FSDT KLAX will sell well because this is a major airport.... But my point is that everybody would also buy it if it would have been released by Fly Tampa with their quality.
I have FT Tampa 2.0 and Athens and they just look awesome to me. Not as good as FSDT but they have enough details for me to enjoy. BluePrint is not acceptable to me but Aerosoft & FlyTampa to name a few have the perfect combo: awesome sceneries and for most of them not enough complex that they couldn't be converted to FS9. Of course, when I can have the FSDT Quality on FS9 like with all your others project, I'm an happy man. But it scares me if more complex sceneries will mean no FSDT FS9 sceneries anymore....
Anyway, you guys are businessman and you sure know your market.... I have no idea of the actual FS9 market compared to FSX. But till now, FlyTampa and Aerosoft for most of their sceneries still think that this is a market with some sales to grab
-
I understand your point... But personally I like the amazing details that FSDT put into their sceneries! IMO all the details, larger ground textures, bump mapping, and various shaders which only is supported by FSX, is just awesome... I like sitting at an airport also sometimes, just going through the preflight for instance, and watching the activity of the airport around me, and gazing at the details of set airport...
I have just done so at FlightBeam KSFO... Just sat at the gate with the PMDG 737NGX - in Cold N' Dark, and watched the 'beast' come to life with the APU, and watched the AI traffic going through their planned routes... and the various ground activity around - and of course admiring the details of the gates, stands, terminals etc ...
Actually I never got to the point of take-off for LAX - *sigh*... :)
And that FSDreamTeam is contantly pushing the envelope in terms of textures shading and modeling, is just amazing IMHO... Although sad, that/if it comes to the expense of FS9 development...
Anyway - just my 2c!
-
It will probably bring us a KLAX scenery like never seen before... But the question I raise is: are those details really important for 95% of the users?
It's always difficult to launch into predictions about what's important for most users. In the end, it's the developer that decides (and take responsibility for his choices, with low sales if his choices are bad), according to his own style.
There are sceneries out there with falling leaves, barking dogs, 3d grass, animated people doing barbecues, you name it. Are those really needed for flying ? Surely not, but they are nice to look at, because of the always important concept of "suspension of disbelief", those details try to have you forget you are looking at a computer screen, if only for a minute.
And there's another aspect, we HAVE to move forward, if we just took sales data, our two bestselling sceneries (Zurich and JFK) didn't had anything of this, Zurich used a lot of FS9 code (before the 2.0 version) and JFK could use some improvement in textures sharpness too, but this didn't affected their sales.
But, if we kept applying the same tried and true methods, we wouldn't be moving forward, which is the sure recipe for demise, maybe not immediately, but before you know it, an iPhone/iPad could match the PC graphic quality, someone might do a flightsim based on it, and we'll end up with our pants down, still using late 2003-techniques...AND we'll be bored to death while doing it because, you should never forget that we do this only until is fun.
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
Indeed, well put. I for one hope FSDT just moves on and forgets about FS9. Its over 8 years old, let it RIP.
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
There are more addons than scenery that we don't want to lose. I've got about 23 addons and nearly only half would work in FSX. This LAX scenery is amazing, and would love to add it to my list of addons...
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
Indeed, well put. I for one hope FSDT just moves on and forgets about FS9. Its over 8 years old, let it RIP.
FS9 is only as old as the latest thing released for it. Why don't YOU RIP ;D
-
Amen.....Newmanix!!!!!!!!
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
Indeed, well put. I for one hope FSDT just moves on and forgets about FS9. Its over 8 years old, let it RIP.
FS9 is only as old as the latest thing released for it. Why don't YOU RIP ;D
man, i was starting to feel like i was the only fs9 supporter left...it gets lonely you know...at least we've still got a few fs9 supporters left. i just never liked fsx because, though i've used it and the capabilities on fsx are greater than fs9, the fs9 addon library is huge and much more developed than in fsx, where the addon library is a bit half done. i mean, the pss 777 and 757 panel, the overland model, and a good zayan shakeeb soundpack, i can't do that in fsx.
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
Indeed, well put. I for one hope FSDT just moves on and forgets about FS9. Its over 8 years old, let it RIP.
FS9 is only as old as the latest thing released for it. Why don't YOU RIP ;D
man, i was starting to feel like i was the only fs9 supporter left...it gets lonely you know...at least we've still got a few fs9 supporters left. i just never liked fsx because, though i've used it and the capabilities on fsx are greater than fs9, the fs9 addon library is huge and much more developed than in fsx, where the addon library is a bit half done. i mean, the pss 777 and 757 panel, the overland model, and a good zayan shakeeb soundpack, i can't do that in fsx.
I am also using fs9 from time to time. But I just bought the PMDG 737 NGX and have not touched fs9 since then. I can't do that in fs9 ;D
-
Did FSDT eventually find the music theme for LA KLAX ?? I was thinking about the Mirac... ah nah forget it.
;D
-
Red Hot Chili Peppers - City Of Angels :D
-
I was a stand strong fs9 user but, PMDG NGX + Mega Scenery Socal v2 + FSDT KLAX............ you cant beat it! I surrendered ;D
-
I was a stand strong fs9 user but, PMDG NGX + Mega Scenery Socal v2 + FSDT KLAX............ you cant beat it! I surrendered ;D
I'm with you right there buddy!
I actually needed FS9 for a while for repaints, but now I'm FSX only as of 3 days ago :D
-
I too, have reservations with going back to FS9 now... I would simply miss the PMDG 737NGX and EZCam to much! Also this LAX scenery is going to draw me in the FSX-direction too! :D
-
To all the FSX users I agree....the capabilities are good and yes I'm capable of running FSX. However FS9 is like the ole muscle car you can't let go vs. the Super Charged yada yada with the expensive computer chip. I'll stick to going under the hood myself. Crazy way to put it, but it works for me. Peace and Happy flying ;D
-
Red Hot Chili Peppers - City Of Angels :D
Here is a great one for FSDT's NEW LAX
-
To all the FSX users I agree....the capabilities are good and yes I'm capable of running FSX. However FS9 is like the ole muscle car you can't let go vs. the Super Charged yada yada with the expensive computer chip. I'll stick to going under the hood myself. Crazy way to put it, but it works for me. Peace and Happy flying ;D
Why trash a good thing?? Wazzup Mr. MAXjet 767??!! I'll call you tomorrow! ;)
-
Not to be a party-pooper or anything here guys, but are people even allowed to use copywritten music on a for profit company website? (without paying money, which would probably be quite a bit considering the level of fame of the bands/songs)
-
Not to be a party-pooper or anything here guys, but are people even allowed to use copywritten music on a for profit company website? (without paying money, which would probably be quite a bit considering the level of fame of the bands/songs)
I don't know, but people aren't supposed to share their product keys with their buddies so they dont have to purchase software, but they do it anyways, just like you guys.
I am with a team called Touch and Go Films, and we make flight sim videos especially for FSDT. The vice president of TAGF offered me the program with a registration key. Now I already owned several other airports like JFK, KLAS, OHare, Ft Lauderdale etc.... When he gave me the key on skype for KDFW, I copied it and pasted it in the registration window.
....Now was I wrong to use Spencer's key which he claimed to be authorized to give out to me since Im part of Touch and Go Films.
-
Not to be a party-pooper or anything here guys, but are people even allowed to use copywritten music on a for profit company website? (without paying money, which would probably be quite a bit considering the level of fame of the bands/songs)
FSDT is not profiting from the music on their site. They are selling LAX scenery not the songs to go with it :P
-
Konbanwa Newmanix San. Right now I am in Tokyo so I cannot answer your call. Hope you are well! I will call when I return......maybe a couple more days. Take care for now.
-
@cmpbllsjc:
I will write this with as much respect as I can, and there is not much left for you.
You have no room to make such accusations about my company with no background. We make videos to promote the products for FSDT. When supplied with the key by an owner of FSDT, Marc was assigned the video, so he was provided the key. How else do you expect him to make the video? As a "hero member" with over 700 posts, I would expect you to show respect to other members, and know how to act on a forum, however, this is CLEARLY not the case. I would appreciate you not defaming the name of my company any more, and recommend you treat this as a fair, and kind warning.
Thanks.
-
Allow me to clarify when I posted that message it was to receive help for a scenery that I was suppose to make for FSDT. The scenery was not given for my own personal enjoyment but to produce a video. Furthermore, I am an actual paying customer and have paid the dollar amount required to own FSDT KDFW. I dont have a borrowed copy but an original authentic copy and I have the receipt as such proof. Hope that puts this all to rest.
Respectfully
Marc Anthony Gonzalez
-
FSDT is not profiting from the music on their site. They are selling LAX scenery not the songs to go with it.
They may not be selling the music, but it is being used to promote their scenery. Unless it is royalty free music, they need to license it.
-
I posted this in the FlyTampa forums, I think it's very relevant for those FSX users who constantly belittle FS9.
I understand the difficult decision you're faced with. The problem with FSX for a lot of current FS9 users (me included) is the hit by AI. For some reason, FSX seems to handle dense AI traffic far worse than FS9, and performance seems to take a big hit. Back in 2008, I splashed out on a new system that could easily handle FSX, only to find that it couldn't handle everything all at once (by that I mean: Scenery, Aircraft, AI and Weather).
With regards to discontinuing FS9... This is where market share comes into play. There are many thousands of us FS9 users (me included) who dedicate hours and hours on enhancing and perfecting AI (I'm part of the UltimateGA team btw). For us, years and years have been spent developing our FlightSims, and jumping ship is a decision that would cause heart ache and many sleepless nights!
Tackling this issue aggressively like FSDT have decided to do is not the answer, and I'm sure after they see FS9 KLAX sales, questions will be asked. They seem to think that cutting out FS9 users completely will be better... well, that maybe for productivity, but it sure as hell won't be best for business.
In some heated discussions I had with Mathijs of Aerosoft, he was hinting sales percentages were roughly a 60/40 split in favour of FSX...... Well... 40%... that is a huge chunk! Especially when it's converted into revenue, cash in the bank, and food on the table.
I know for a fact that Aerosoft were hoping to completely cut out FS9... but they've had to back track on this decision. When Nice X was released... Mathijs was totally arrogant, ignorant and very rude in his replies at requests for an FS9 version. Well... what happens a year later... an FS9 version is released!
Whichever decision you make, I know it won't be taken lightly. Having recently seen Orbx's latest technology breakthroughs and their latest scenery of..... a shed?.... :D ... I can understand how FS9 must be holding you back creatively, but as long as we are here in numbers, I can't see how it's feasible to stop FS9 completely, when hundreds upon hundreds of FS9 copies could be sold. It's a totally understandable that FS9 versions will have to be stripped back, and won't feature any of the FSX eye candy, but as long as there is a market, there is a product.
Hope this gives you another angle on things from an FS9 perspective.
Many thanks for your time,
Alex
-
I posted this in the FlyTampa forums, I think it's very relevant for those FSX users who constantly belittle FS9.
Apart for the supposedly bad FSX performances argument, which is now obsolete, and our supposed "aggressivity" about dealing with this issue, which is of course wrong, since we are still supporting FS9, and we couldn't think of a smoother transition on our side (it's taking *years*, so much for "aggressivity"...) it's all looks reasonable, of course the market is always the main driving factor, otherwise we would have stopped on FS9 a long time ago.
However, it's always a question of finding the balancing point: it's one thing to take a standard FSX scenery and just "strip" features to convert it to FS9, but it's entirely different redoing it from scratch because, as it's being made, by just stripping features that FS9 doesn't support, it would look like crap JUST to serve the FS9 market, which is a minority right now BECAUSE, in the SAME time we rebuild such scenery from scratch, we could do ANOTHER scenery.
At a certain point, there are diminishing returns, and the time/effort it takes to convert for FS9 might become more than doing another product. We WERE able to keep the conversion time very low up to now, but this has held back our FSX development because we had to design in FSX to be easily convertible in FS9 right from the start, and this means lowering the quality in FSX and giving the out the wrong idea that than others that haven't discovered anything, but are simply using FSX to do what is supposed to do (even if all they do are sheds and cabins) are ahead of us, and this is just not right because, if we don't keep moving forward and improve, we'll eventually go the way of the Dodo without even realizing it.
There ARE technical issues which are creating us real problems, it's not a "political" decision, and we are STILL scratching our heads trying to find a way to make such conversion to FS9 possible, without losing too much quality, but it's not easy at all, and on top of that, there's a Cloud9 version which we sell that works well and looks quite good even today.
All of this, just to say that we haven't changed a bit our position on KLAX for FS9, since it was first announced:
- We'll try to do our best to convert it for FS9 BUT, if it will look like crap (meaning, worse than the Cloud9 version), it's no use doing it. No, we don't have any intention of releasing something that doesn't look right to us and let users decide, because it's always here that users will come for complaints and we have a reputation of quality.
So, regardless of what anyone might think, we still have NOT reached a decision about this, we are still at the phase of speculating HOW we might do a reasonable FS9 version, but the final decision will be made only when we can see something in FS9. Since the FSX version is not done yet, we haven't done any test on FS9 right now, it's all theoretical discussions we are having internally.
The only thing decided, is the FSX version will be released immediately as it's done, because it's just not fair towards FSX users holding back a release, just because we are busy with what might be a complex FS9 conversion.
The announcement whether there will be an FS9 version or not, will be made after the FSX version would go on sale and after we took our time to do all our tests in FS9. Up to that time, don't assume anything, and don't assume from all my previous post, that we might have already decided, because we haven't. As I've explained already, the one and only reason for those posts, was to EXPLAIN why it's so difficult for us to do an FS9 version this time.
And, don't forget we have different people working on sceneries at the same time, we might even find a somewhat compromise solution, which is keep supporting FS9 with one team only, even if we would eventually skip KLAX because, as I've said, the decision is not political or reflects any "policy" we have towards FS9, it's just a consequence of the specific technical issues we are facing due to how KLAX has been designed.
-
I posted this in the FlyTampa forums, I think it's very relevant for those FSX users who constantly belittle FS9.
I understand the difficult decision you're faced with. The problem with FSX for a lot of current FS9 users (me included) is the hit by AI. For some reason, FSX seems to handle dense AI traffic far worse than FS9, and performance seems to take a big hit. Back in 2008, I splashed out on a new system that could easily handle FSX, only to find that it couldn't handle everything all at once (by that I mean: Scenery, Aircraft, AI and Weather).
With regards to discontinuing FS9... This is where market share comes into play. There are many thousands of us FS9 users (me included) who dedicate hours and hours on enhancing and perfecting AI (I'm part of the UltimateGA team btw). For us, years and years have been spent developing our FlightSims, and jumping ship is a decision that would cause heart ache and many sleepless nights!
Tackling this issue aggressively like FSDT have decided to do is not the answer, and I'm sure after they see FS9 KLAX sales, questions will be asked. They seem to think that cutting out FS9 users completely will be better... well, that maybe for productivity, but it sure as hell won't be best for business.
In some heated discussions I had with Mathijs of Aerosoft, he was hinting sales percentages were roughly a 60/40 split in favour of FSX...... Well... 40%... that is a huge chunk! Especially when it's converted into revenue, cash in the bank, and food on the table.
I know for a fact that Aerosoft were hoping to completely cut out FS9... but they've had to back track on this decision. When Nice X was released... Mathijs was totally arrogant, ignorant and very rude in his replies at requests for an FS9 version. Well... what happens a year later... an FS9 version is released!
Whichever decision you make, I know it won't be taken lightly. Having recently seen Orbx's latest technology breakthroughs and their latest scenery of..... a shed?.... :D ... I can understand how FS9 must be holding you back creatively, but as long as we are here in numbers, I can't see how it's feasible to stop FS9 completely, when hundreds upon hundreds of FS9 copies could be sold. It's a totally understandable that FS9 versions will have to be stripped back, and won't feature any of the FSX eye candy, but as long as there is a market, there is a product.
Hope this gives you another angle on things from an FS9 perspective.
Many thanks for your time,
Alex
And in the future you want all sceneries for FS9, FSX, Flight and X Plane 10? ;D
-
@cmpbllsjc:
I will write this with as much respect as I can, and there is not much left for you.
You have no room to make such accusations about my company with no background. We make videos to promote the products for FSDT. When supplied with the key by an owner of FSDT, Marc was assigned the video, so he was provided the key. How else do you expect him to make the video? As a "hero member" with over 700 posts, I would expect you to show respect to other members, and know how to act on a forum, however, this is CLEARLY not the case. I would appreciate you not defaming the name of my company any more, and recommend you treat this as a fair, and kind warning.
Thanks.
Fair enough, maybe you two aren't the "sharing type" I thought you were. Mark's post led me to believe otherwise, especially since you two are high school kids.
You can spare me the drama with the rest of your post. ::)
-
especially since you two are high school kids.
Well that's insulting and I have no affiliation with Touch and Go. I'm no longer in high school but when I was, I would hope people would have the decency to not judge me by being in high school. I like to think that I was quite mature for my age and when I see comments like this that just dismisses someone as being "just another high school kid," it is rather rude.
-
It's wonderful that the teams are making the effort. We (I) are grateful for that. Thank you Umberto!
-
especially since you two are high school kids.
Well that's insulting and I have no affiliation with Touch and Go. I'm no longer in high school but when I was, I would hope people would have the decency to not judge me by being in high school. I like to think that I was quite mature for my age and when I see comments like this that just dismisses someone as being "just another high school kid," it is rather rude.
Thank you, now can we get over this drama and enjoy the fact that FSDreamteam is making an incredible scenery?
-
Well that's insulting and I have no affiliation with Touch and Go. I'm no longer in high school but when I was, I would hope people would have the decency to not judge me by being in high school. I like to think that I was quite mature for my age and when I see comments like this that just dismisses someone as being "just another high school kid," it is rather rude.
He'll survive Isaac. Being dismissed as a high school kid isn't that damaging, there's a lot of things worse than that. But you know, kids will be kids.
Thank you, now can we get over this drama and enjoy the fact that FSDreamteam is making an incredible scenery?
I agree with the "Director" :-*
Let's move on - 3-2-1 Action............
-
Agreed, however, I thank you for making it very easy for me to make a first impression on you sir. ::)
You just can't let it go can you. Moving on :)
EDIT: Spelling error
-
Agreed, however, I thank you for making it very easy for me to make a first impression on you sir. ::)
You just can't let it go can you. Moving on :)
EDIT: Spelling error
LOL, you already made your first impression a long time ago, when you though I was a cool guy.
Sorry to ruin it for you :(
Thanks for being a cool guy. We should talk more
Slade
YEAH, let's move on and STOP the sensless bickering, we can do that via PM.
-
we might even find a somewhat compromise solution, which is keep supporting FS9 with one team only
I had that same idea recently. I was trying to think of a way where both sims could continue to be supported!
-
Hm, I remember those messages, not sure what I did to make you attack me, but never the less, I refuse to continue the spam over this issue that you have for some reason brought up. As you said, we can continue this on PM if you so wish.
-
I'm a FS9 user mainly because I have spent so much money on add-ons that I would be mad not to find them anymore in FSX. That is the main reason, most of us still use FS9.
You need to come up with a better excuse than that. ;D
With the exception of a fistful of developers, any scenery you've purchased for either FS9 or FSX have the other version available free in your download account at whatever store you purchased it. Your only expense is the copy of FSX, and the Gold edition is $30 at Amazon.
Indeed, well put. I for one hope FSDT just moves on and forgets about FS9. Its over 8 years old, let it RIP.
FS9 is only as old as the latest thing released for it. Why don't YOU RIP ;D
man, i was starting to feel like i was the only fs9 supporter left...it gets lonely you know...at least we've still got a few fs9 supporters left. i just never liked fsx because, though i've used it and the capabilities on fsx are greater than fs9, the fs9 addon library is huge and much more developed than in fsx, where the addon library is a bit half done. i mean, the pss 777 and 757 panel, the overland model, and a good zayan shakeeb soundpack, i can't do that in fsx.
I am also using fs9 from time to time. But I just bought the PMDG 737 NGX and have not touched fs9 since then. I can't do that in fs9 ;D
Call me crazy, but I live in my own little world where the only flights I fly are recreations of real-life flights. I like things to be as realistic as possible, and just to add to realism, I fly a real life flight. I am huge on the Boeing 777 and Boeing 757, and the panels by PSS for FS9, along with a good soundpack, and a model merge, it's more realistic than anything I've ever found on FS9 or FSX. Since I can't find the 777 in FSX, nor do I have nearly the number of scenery addon options in FSX, despite the better graphics, to me, it's not worth the trade for. TO ME! I'm not saying to any of you FSX users that it was a bad trade off, and I'm not even talking about people who switched from FS9 to FSX. It's just a thing I like.
-
No worries, I will keep flying the PMDG 737NGX built to Boeing specs and then buy the PMDG 777 built to Boeing specs in FSX into the ultra realistic non-dumbed down KLAX. ;D
-
If it takes as long to finish the 777 as the 737, it will have to be for Flight. FSX will be retired by then. ;D
-
I doubt FSX will be retired. As PMDG mentioned before the 777 will come much sooner then the 737 because they already have the framework for the future. Now why would you think FSX will be retired soon after Flight? FS9 still hasn't died out yet(very surprised), so i'm sure it will be same situation when Flight comes out. I will play and have both anyways so it doesn't even matter to me.
Raul
-
All i can do is face palm myself from 40,000ft the theme of this debate is lame. >:(
-
Now why would you think FSX will be retired soon after Flight?
I said it would be retired before the 777 is released, not shortly after Flight. As for already having the framework for the future, seeing is believing.
-
Considering the actual release of the NGX and the simple fact it uses PMDG's new SDK outside of FSX SDK as it was too limited in functionality, I'd say we have seen enough to believe and the rest is common since. If knowing anything about anything you come to a quick conclusion that this is what took the most time making something from the ground up and involving high levels of C++ and new VNAV algorithms that were not carried over from past projects. And if they did not carry over old development techniques or use FS9 NG then I highly say that they will use their new development techniques on the 777 to speed up production as they are not stupid and of course would do this as the overall goal of the new SDK was not single handily for the NGX but all projects to come as it gave them the power to do things they could not do before and would not have a need to make a even newer SDK for T7. As some of the T7 project has already been worked on even in the NGX development.
As for framework this is tons of C++ code witch will only need to be altered/tweaked or variables adjusted to allow the 777 specifications. dud
I say your Flight comments regarding the T7 vs FSX lifespan are further out in left field then the 777 development and I think you should turn you attention there if you need to "see to believe" as Flight really has not shown jack or mention squat about Flight and what it's to entail or if it will even be a platform developers what to developer third party add-ons for to even talk of it replacing something. (A few videos and pics) Developers who have talked to Microsoft have signed NDA and Flight's website leaves a lot more questions then answers in just were they are taking it, let alone a add-on market and not even the same team is making it. It's likely to try to reach a larger market witch in return would make it more a game/arcade then a sim for someone well establish in the current and past MSFS franchise. Hell it could have DX11, Tessellation, or even Physics all of witch would be new to a current FS developers on top of what maybe a new game engine. Really if I were Microsoft I be pissed that my 80 dollar game has it own little sub economy behind it that they get no parts of.
And even if the T7 took three year FSX still be kicking as people still play FS9 and I expect there will still be some who have not retired FS9.
But hey what do I know? I only have 4 post here, and the all the 'experts' have hundreds.
-
@cmpbllsjc:
I will write this with as much respect as I can, and there is not much left for you.
You have no room to make such accusations about my company with no background. We make videos to promote the products for FSDT. When supplied with the key by an owner of FSDT, Marc was assigned the video, so he was provided the key. How else do you expect him to make the video? As a "hero member" with over 700 posts, I would expect you to show respect to other members, and know how to act on a forum, however, this is CLEARLY not the case. I would appreciate you not defaming the name of my company any more, and recommend you treat this as a fair, and kind warning.
Thanks.
Fair enough, maybe you two aren't the "sharing type" I thought you were. Mark's post led me to believe otherwise, especially since you two are high school kids.
You can spare me the drama with the rest of your post. ::)
hey guys no disrespect, but Im 43 yrs old. Furthermore, Im not part of the Touch and Go Films team anymore. Just want to clarify those two things. Thanks.
-
hey guys no disrespect, but Im 43 yrs old. Furthermore, Im not part of the Touch and Go Films team anymore. Just want to clarify those two things. Thanks.
Yes, I know your over 40, I was refering to Spencer and the other kid as the "high school kids". I already knew you were just about old enough to be their dad.
-
Really if I were Microsoft I be pissed that my 80 dollar game has it own little sub economy behind it that they get no parts of.
Every time a new user like yourself comes along and purchases FSX or FS9, Microsoft makes money. And they'll make a lot more once Flight comes out, because the odds are good that every simmer will want it.
-
Really if I were Microsoft I be pissed that my 80 dollar game has it own little sub economy behind it that they get no parts of.
Every time a new user like yourself comes along and purchases FSX or FS9, Microsoft makes money. And they'll make a lot more once Flight comes out, because the odds are good that every simmer will want it.
Maybe.....maybe not so.! I was looking forward to upgrading from fs9 to fsx, only to find at the release that NONE of the add ons I had purchased for fs9 would port across, it was this fact alone that stopped me from buying fsx, me and hundreds of others like me. So to say that every simmer will want microsoft flight is a broad statement much like saying every simmer will want to buy scenery from Blueprint.....lets wait and see what Aerosofts simulator looks like first. I doubt that any thing I have from fs9 will port across into either, but if they (Microsoft) want to corner the market make a new simulator that will run flight,fsx and fs9 software and then everyone might want it. Besides the benafit given with fsx from fs9 with many hundereds of $$ add -on's, is not even close to making me want to move, so Flight will have to have something special... :-\
-
Sorry i know everybodys asking but it looks very fun and i really want to the release date. So can you please tell us it and if you dont have one, can you tell us a time frame
-
Sorry i know everybodys asking but it looks very fun and i really want to the release date. So can you please tell us it and if you dont have one, can you tell us a time frame
*insert generic response about release date being not known yet and how it has been re-iterated multiple times here*
FSDreamteam has said that it will be released sometime soon, but exact date is not known
-
They said very soon last week. Dig through the forums and youll find your answers. Im expecting before the end of the month.
-
I'd keep an eye out this Friday...
-
Watch it come out the very begining of labor day weekend
-
I'd keep an eye out this Friday...
+1 I certainly hope so.
By the way Ryan, I've been meaning to tell you this but everytime I read that quote next to your name I laugh... Very funny quote.
-
I doubt that any thing I have from fs9 will port across into either, but if they (Microsoft) want to corner the market make a new simulator that will run flight,fsx and fs9 software and then everyone might want it
In a perfect world that would be great but in reality it's like trying to put Jalopy parts on a Ferrari. MS has the market anyway, no need to spend time on old technology, It's a business and the idea is to stay in business and not waste time or money. Spending time on old technology to satisfy a few is a waste of time and money.
-
I doubt that any thing I have from fs9 will port across into either, but if they (Microsoft) want to corner the market make a new simulator that will run flight,fsx and fs9 software and then everyone might want it
In a perfect world that would be great but in reality it's like trying to put Jalopy parts on a Ferrari. MS has the market anyway, no need to spend time on old technology, It's a business and the idea is to stay in business and not waste time or money. Spending time on old technology to satisfy a few is a waste of time and money.
Yes. If it were only a few which is not the case when it comes to developing products for FS9. If it were only a few, developers would have stopped long ago. It's because there are so many, they continue to do so. It's the extra time and work involved to do so that's the problem.
A good example of this is the fact that Microsoft still sells Windows XP. You can still choose to have XP preinstalled insted of 7/Vista.
-
Yes. If it were only a few which is not the case when it comes to developing products for FS9. If it were only a few, developers would have stopped long ago. It's because there are so many, they continue to do so. It's the extra time and work involved to do so that's the problem.
A good example of this is the fact that Microsoft still sells Windows XP. You can still choose to have XP preinstalled insted of 7/Vista.
True to some extent with developers of FS9 add-ons, if that's the way they choose to direct the business then so be it. As far as the XP and Windows 7 options. I can see MS offering either one. Every Windows based computer needs an operating system but not every computer needs a Flight Simulator. Microsoft will sell a whole lot more operating systems than FSDT will sell add-ons. Like wise MS sells or will sell a ton of Flight Simulators either FS9, FSX, or Flight, but what I'm getting at is when it comes to addons the people who want them are few and the people who want what I consider the high end add-ons such as FSDT products are even fewer. Don't get me wrong there are a lot of people who buy the addons but there are more who don't.
-
Watch it come out the very begining of labor day weekend
Labor day is in September, we were told an August release was likely. ;)
-
Watch it come out the very begining of labor day weekend
Labor day is in September, we were told an August release was likely. ;)
Sounds very exciting... That would mean a release within the next 6-7 days... :)
-
A good example of this is the fact that Microsoft still sells Windows XP. You can still choose to have XP preinstalled insted of 7/Vista.
I do not believe this is correct. A quick check of the online Microsoft store shows only Windows 7 and Windows 7 upgrade versions for sale. I know Microsoft will still support Windows XP and Vista but they are no longer selling it and PCs are now only being shipped with Windows 7. I also vaguely remember Microsoft announcing when they would officially end support for Windows XP.
Wait a tick...looks like you can still have Vista on a new PC, not XP though.. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lifecycle
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/how-long-will-microsoft-support-xp-vista-and-windows-7/2304
-
Watch it come out the very begining of labor day weekend
Labor day is in September, we were told an August release was likely. ;)
Sounds very exciting... That would mean a release within the next 6-7 days... :)
Lets not get ahead of ourselves, they haven't shown night shots yet. And who knows with how much they stepped the bar up for the day scenery what they will do with the night stuff. ESPECIALLY since there is so much color/changing color present in the scenery lighting
-
Watch it come out the very begining of labor day weekend
Labor day is in September, we were told an August release was likely. ;)
Sounds very exciting... That would mean a release within the next 6-7 days... :)
Lets not get ahead of ourselves, they haven't shown night shots yet. And who knows with how much they stepped the bar up for the day scenery what they will do with the night stuff. ESPECIALLY since there is so much color/changing color present in the scenery lighting
If you take a quick history lesson of all the flight simulator products that have been released in the past, youll notice that 90% percent of the time FS products are released later then the developers origionally planned on them being released. Not saying thats a bad thing. The lastest previews don't lie, there is light at the end of tunnel. Lets take what sjt375 said into consideration, they aren't done yet. But they're putting the final touches on a master piece as we type
-
A good example of this is the fact that Microsoft still sells Windows XP. You can still choose to have XP preinstalled insted of 7/Vista.
I do not believe this is correct. A quick check of the online Microsoft store shows only Windows 7 and Windows 7 upgrade versions for sale. I know Microsoft will still support Windows XP and Vista but they are no longer selling it and PCs are now only being shipped with Windows 7. I also vaguely remember Microsoft announcing when they would officially end support for Windows XP.
Wait a tick...looks like you can still have Vista on a new PC, not XP though.. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lifecycle
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/how-long-will-microsoft-support-xp-vista-and-windows-7/2304
Keep looking.... One good start is with custom built PC's. You have an option to have XP installed which means Microsoft has to continue to sell the licenses in order to have the option. XP is like FS9 to an extent. There is a large base that doesn't like W7 or Vista. So they stick to what is good. Now I never wanted to leave XP, but I did at some point switch to Vista which was a DUMB move as everyone here knows Vista is crap. But W7 is quite good. Rough in the beginning but good now. I hope FLight will be my W7 because FSX is my Vista and FS9 is my XP. :)
-
Keep looking.... One good start is with custom built PC's. You have an option to have XP installed which means Microsoft has to continue to sell the licenses in order to have the option.
Just checked iBuyPower, CyberPower, and some well-known brand names in the PC market and none of them offer Windows XP for made-to-order PCs.
Might want to take a look at this as well: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/software/2008-06-30-microsoft-xp_N.htm
-
It seems you are right. I just checked all my normal sites including http://www.jetlinesystems.com/
Well it did last far longer then any other Microsoft OS...
-
@ Newmanix whats up?
-
@ Newmanix whats up?
Here ya go MAX! You need to reactivate your FB page dude!
http://flightsimbuzz.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-scenery-coming-soon-from-japan.html