[jhb_airlines] Re: Defrag needs

  • From: "Tom Smith" <ftd.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:59:09 -0000

I remember that and some old goat giving me a right dressing down just because I sent a screen save to the list in the wrong format which took 1/2 hour to down load

I am still smarting [ONE DAY]
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 8:19 PM
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Defrag needs

That's the trouble with trying to get your product out before the opposition
- corners are cut in haste.

Remember when Mally was first trying out his photo scenery idea and gave us
a little section of south Wales to play with? We flew that little bit for
weeks so that all the bugs could be ironed out. When the full version was
ready we also flew that extensively too - covering every single bitmap to
check it was OK. It was time well spent as we spotted several misplaced
bitmaps (sods to find too) and holes - all of which helped the final product to be released with a fair degree of quality control. I've still got the VFR
beta CD's around somewhere..


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 17 November 2006 19:23
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Defrag needs

The current in phrase, with both reviewers and sellers of addons, seems
to be roughly "The computer does not yet exist, nor is it likely to,
that will permit you to run FSX with all sliders on max".
If this is so, then it leads inevitably to the proposition that FSX
cannot have been tested as an integrated package. Testing of individual
sections, with sliders at max, maybe. Everything going, no.
So they are selling something which they cannot properly have tested.

Or am I missing something?

Having said that, past experience suggests it was ever so.

I'm more pi...d off at the launching of the Horizon package with such
glaring faults, assuming it's not just down to finger trouble on the
part of those list members who've bought it. How on earth can a glaring
fault get through, in the Lake District? I'd guarrantee that Lakes and
Snowdonia are two areas most people will visit, to see how spectacular
they are. A big hole in East Anglia is a different matter. More a
question of how you could spot the fault...............

Gerry Winskill

Bones wrote:

It may surprise you but my own feeling are similar to Peter's because
I am getting fed up with chasing the mythical beast of FS perfection.
It's becoming a fantasy - and a goal that sees users spending endless
barrels of cash trying to achieve.

I'm still struggling with poor frame rates in FS9. They've always been
poor because my kit hasn't been up to running it - but then I see the
insidious pattern that has dogged my whole FS experience. It goes
something like this:

1. Buy FS and install. Turn all the options right down because your
system can't cope with every feature turned on and set to max (only
future computers will have the power to do this).

2. Wait for future computing power to become available.

3. During this wait goodies come along that really are worth having.
Buy these, and see FS performance begin to drop a tiny notch or two.

4. Finally you upgrade but find that it only allows you to run FS full
tilt in its basic form and that switching add-ons on still requires a
sacrifice in turning down some features.

5. Further exciting add-ons arrive which take FS to an unprecedented
level of realism but you now accept the inevitable loss in performance.

6. Consider a second upgrade to run FS in its full glory for once in
your life with every slider maxed and every button ticked. Just as you
are seriously thinking about this and looking at hardware along comes
a new version of FS.

7. Go back to square one.

With FS4 there was a huge amount of third party support and the sim
became extremely popular. As mentioned in a thread the other day I
still have a lot of the add-on disks around because I spent a huge
amount of money on this sim. I upgraded to FS5 but many users fought
this as the add-ons were (mostly) not compatible with the new sim and
its round world modelling. The FS4 forum on CompuServe kept running
for quite a long time.

FS5 was good but it suffered too many updates. FS5 - FS5.1 - FSFW95,
all with tweaks to the system that required rebuilding any scenery you
had made. FS98 was the next really big evolution and it was probably
the most popular version created. Two reasons for this - first that it
was a damn good sim and had a HUGE amount of third party support. The
second was that it lasted four years because FS2000 was a dog and very
few users migrated to it - I bought it but I only recorded a handful
of flights in it.

This four year life of FS98 gave us a huge advantage because hardware
allowed most of us to eventually run the sim with lots of add-ons and
still get pleasing frame rates. It was probably the sim with the
highest user satisfaction rating. Of course FS2002 came along and,
after 4 years, the change was striking. Terrain modelling, GMax
aircraft and ambient lighting effects were far too good to ignore and
everyone was eager for change anyway.

In truth FS2002 has had a four year run because FS2004 was basically a
tuned up version. This has given designers yet another 4 year period
to develop superb add-ons for aircraft, scenery and utilities. It has
probably ended up as our most expensive FS package yet when we look at
the investment we have poured into it. In my case it isn't just
scenery and aircraft but hardware like GoFlight units (with three USB
hubs to run them), Track IR and endless minor items. Trouble is that
all these upgrades have zapped the life out of the sim and balance out
any hardware upgrades almost equally. I started FS2004 with about
20fps and that is what I still get if I am lucky.

The trouble now is that having got almost a perfect simulation setup
it drives me in a different direction. I'd like to get it running at
an optimum level and experience the full beauty of ASv6's clouds,
flying the PMDG 747 over the VFGM scenery stutterless rather than
think about dumping the lot in favour of a new version that will run
like a mammoth in a tar pool. To do this I require yet another
computer upgrade - the latest hardware will probably let FS2004 run as
it has never been seen before and it might even let FSX run reasonably
decently in it's basic (no add-on) state.

My desire for FSX is minimal. My desire to overcome the frustration of
running FS2004 at a snails pace is far greater - it is really THAT
frustrating. I know what ASv6 can do but I can't let it run free. I
know what the PMDG 747 is like but I can't use it without seeing the
sim drop down to single figures and very sluggish operation. I'd like
to go into FS2004's options and tick things like Ground Scenery casts
Shadows because everyone says turn this off and I always have
done. That isn't fun, it's a crippled system and I'm fed up with it.

FSx won't run in its true glory until Vista and DX10 (DXX?) is out. My
guess is that the system to run that lot at a decent level is still on
the drawing board (or CAD package). I can wait for FSX.


    -----Original Message-----
    *From:* jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Kev Townsend
    *Sent:* 17 November 2006 12:31
    *To:* jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    *Subject:* [jhb_airlines] Re: Defrag needs

    I am disheartened to read this here Peter.

    For someone who purports to have been a "pioneer" himself, with
    Gemini and the "first" online multiplayer session I question your
    comments associated with the latest offering in the FS evolution.
    As you once famously posted "I only have mental energy for one
    on-line service" I realise that you remain content with your
    current _Cix VFR Club_ / Vatsim setup, and that you may be happy
    to wait to embrace FSX until all the programs you currently enjoy
    are proven in the new version. At this time the technology will
    have reduced in price to make the changeover practical and

    "It would have to be a major improvement over FS2004 and be
    backwards compatible for me to part with my money" well it is a
    major improvement, but I question the "backwards compatibility you
    crave". Microsoft don't make any "Add-ons" so there is little or
    no need for them to make FSX "backwards compatible" with FS9. They
    continue to push the envelope! I believe that they are restricted
    at the lower end of that envelope, by current users expectation,
    or desire to have a "soft" upgrade experience. I fully believe
    they have of necessity limited the upper envelope due to
    constraints related to this expectation.

    The net is full of Naysayers, but there are a sizeable hard core
    of FS users who's enjoyment of the latest, greatest sim is in the
    conquering of these challenges, above actually flying in it. Let's
    not forget the Add-on designers who are facing challenges to
    maximise the opportunities to their craft from the advances within
    FSX that are available to them now. New product lines and profits
    keep the hobby alive.

    As a ppl holder myself, I strive to achieve as close to visual
    reality as possible. Yes, for some time now we have had "reality"
    in terms of cockpit visuals and operation, particularly in VFR
    craft, however for those users who have never enjoyed the
    experience of flying GA the simulation still has a long way to go

    I am engrossed. I have both FS9 and FSX on my system and am able
    to directly compare. I (like Gerry) am not "bonkers"!

    Best wishes

    Kev T

    On 11/17/2006 10:12:00, pdodds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
    > Gerry,
    > I think you are "one of the few" who is continuing to battle
    with FSX.  I
    > really admire your
    > tenacity.  It doesn't work with TrackIR, Vatsim, IVAO, Lots of
    scenery and aircraft, FSNet, FSNav
    > etc. etc. etc. There is no-one in the Cix VFR Club using it.
    > You are truly one of those pioneers that everyone thinks is
    bonkers until history proves they were
    > actually heros!
    > <Bows respectfully>
    > Peter

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.6/536 - Release Date: 16/11/2006 15:51

Other related posts: