The UI is terrible, but you get used to it if you need to, as I had to when X-Plane was the only simulator for Macs. Obviously, someone very content with FS2004 or FSX doesn't need to push past that initial "ugh!". It's very interesting that the first hurdle can be the stumbling block, though. It illustrates that Laminar Research should spend some effort on putting it right. I don't think anyone, even the staunchest X-Plane supporter, would mourn the loss of the old one.
Frame rates and optimisation are a subject of intense debate amongst X-Plane users. X-Plane 10 is still a very raw product as Laminar gradually optimise it for the cocktail of processors, operating systems and graphics cards out here in the world. I have confidence that I will jump across to 10 with both feet eventually, but perhaps not until the Summer.
Some would argue that Laminar were bonkers to bring out a product 6 months before it was ready, and cheeky to charge for a beta, but the X-Plane community enjoys getting stuff early and tinkering with it, most people are running the demo anyway, so it's not cost them anything yet. The introduction of the new version is a period of high excitement and frenetic activity on forums.
X-Plane 9.7 lacks the new lighting and weather features of 10, but it's a better first-time experience. I still strongly recommend that anyone new to X-Plane tries 9 first. I also much prefer the demo location of Innsbruck, Austria (LOWI). The choice of aircraft that come with X-Plane 9 is even worse than with 10, but there are a couple of acceptable GA aircraft, and those that like airliners might try the x737 and QPAC Airbus (with 2D panels) that I recommended for Ben.
No, they charge for a full license, which includes global scenery and upgrades for the lifecycle of the product. The demo is free, and the choice is yours whether and when to commit to the full license.
I think you missed the point. The point is when you pay for Microsoft Flight Simulator, Strike Fighters Project 2, LOMAC, or any other flight simulator you get a 99% finished product that just requires a few bug fixes. With X-Plane, you initially get a half-working game that no real publisher would dare put on sale and then have to wait until the 5th or 6th release of it for you to be able to really use it because they rush it out the door every time. They did it for X-Plane 7, X-Plane 8, X-Plane 9, and now X-Plane 10. In that entire time, FS has released 3 versions and all have been much more complete on release than X-Plane was. It's why they've not been able to become the powerhouse they claim they are.
I use Flight Simulator, too, and there is no doubt that it is a more polished, professional product. Having spent the money on X-Plane 8, 9, 10, I am the one who should be aggrieved that they release new products prematurely. I'm not. I have had a great deal of pleasure out of 9; in that sense it has been worth every dollar, and I am sure it will be the same with 10.
I get as frustrated as anyone by X-Plane's shortcomings; but it is still great fun, it is constantly improving, with future potential and a growing customer base. For me, a far more important issue is the lack of good aircraft, and especially that British aircraft are very poorly represented.
It's no fun trying to defend X-Plane's marketing policy, but I would be very happy to help anyone with genuine curiosity about exploring X-Plane to get over the initial turbulence (that interface ~ shudders). My motivation is to create more interesting and good quality aircraft for X-Plane which is something I am able to change.
can I claim them a dependent on my taxes?
