Cameron

Closed per request.

Read instead. ...or are you saying you have this issue with the aircraft you develop?

I know people who wouldn't pay Apple's or Bose's premiums. I also know an overwhelming amount who would. You can't use simple percentage points as a way to gauge costs of an add-on. If that's how you apply logic, a reality check is in order. Supply and demand play a very large role in economics. Laminar's reach of people who buy the sim JUST for the sim without add-on's allows them an afforded opportunity to lower the cost of the sim. I remember when X-Plane was $299 prior to its growth spurt, and I suppose all the MSFS developers have it wrong now too. Heck, I can buy MSFS X for $19.99! Someone better write in to REX and PMDG about their deceptive, greedy profiteering quickly!

I know a lot of flight schools and people that would love to disagree with you. Overall you sound like a tough person to satisfy to begin with. No offense, but when you knock everything you buy it sounds like a matter of priorities are offset and a grain of salt to your word is to be taken. Um, no. The word "all" implies everyone. This is about as far off a statement as they come. You are in an underwhelming minority of people making such noise...trust me. Please take care in how you word things.

This makes no sense at all. That would imply that our customers reporting such improvements have the same exact setup as we do. Probability: Very unlikely.

How do you get that? It reads to me: Most of, almost all, majority, not all...but most. Your mileage may vary, but I'd say (as have others here) that the statement holds true for an overwhelming majority (and also clearly on the very reviews section you speak of). The wording is very clear. You're trying to interpret it as "SkyMaxx Pro guarantees you 100%, without doubt, improvement in FPS over default"...it doesn't say that.

Let's quote the product page, shall we? In fact, most of our test team showed that when running default X-Plane 10 clouds vs. SkyMaxx Pro clouds, SkyMaxx Pro had better frame rates over the default X-Plane 10 clouds! Where exactly did you see this as definitively applicable to you? Have a read around about SkyMaxx Pro and you'll quickly find that in almost all cases the statement holds true for our customers as well. It simply is a statement that explains the result to an overwhelming majority of people. It's far from broke. The memory leak is VERY slow moving. It is NOT something to tank performance. I personally run SMP on a lesser MBP setup than you (750M 2048MB) on a TB display. Attaining 30 fps with the setup is quite simple. It may be time for you to consider a fresh demo install of X-Plane with only SMP in it and see what happens there. If your performance is better in the demo, then you can be assured that there is likely something else playing "fun" here.

Click the LEGS key.

Green light means Valve is willing to talk. It does not mean for sale!

No sir.

Clouds are NOT always blue: http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/skymaxx-p-101.html <---- These images are unaltered. This is dependent on your settings, including the sky colors AND time of day. Be sure that when you select a new sky color you properly re-load it within sim. No, you cannot change such saturation without changing sky as well. The sim depends on these things as a whole. You can certainly create or download a new sky color set to your liking, however.

You would know if we were.

It is implemented as intended.

Indeed, this is just old SASL developers using past logic that should have been changed back about a year ago but they never updated their manuals, even for the 757. There are no known conflicts.

This would be when CTOT is active. After you've disengaged the "airplane is yours". This will maintain speed based on angle of attack (or adjusting it). You still need throttle power to achieve optimal configuration.

CTOT is not a system to be used during the climb phase; only on takeoff.

This leak does not apply to the Saab. It is for SMP and potentially the CRJ.

No sir.

You don't have to wait. There's ways to avoid the error. A search of topics already discussed here will bring it up.

Likely not, only because SMP is already written (and the likelihood of such data becoming available is next to nil anyhow). This is really a job for a weather injector; something I'm sure will come by someone, somewhere (it's only logical), but not by way of something incorporated into SkyMaxx Pro itself.

Nothing has changed since the last update provided.

The required data to do this is not accessible, so the quick answer is "no" for now.

I don't know of any conflict with SASL. Just the A320 NEO, which the author already created a beta patch for.

That's correct behavior. X-Plane is telling SkyMaxx Pro that the weather has changed in the pocket/area you are flying, and that the weather should change. There's a topic here somewhere on this. If you fly in areas with heavy precip, then fly to an area of a pocket of clear sky, X-Plane will tell SMP to re-draw for the area currently being flown in. We haven't figured out how to tackle this yet for such real weather scenarios.

I think you have a misunderstanding as to how this all works. NOAA (a weather injection app, but using close to default X-Plane real weather standards), tells X-Plane's weather engine what to do. X-Plane's weather engine tells SkyMaxx Pro what to do. The problem with NOAA is the refresh rate at which it updates weather, which will make the pauses more visible. In comparison to something like XSB or X-Plane real weather, NOAA will perform worse. This is not something we can control, as we did not program this NOAA application and how it deciphers when to change weather state (or how often for that matter). I quite clearly stated that from a pause standpoint, we have essentially got the best we can out of this. MOST of our customers who reported pauses now report less than a second to NO pause at all with 1.2, whereas others report better results, but not satisfactory from a personal point of view (read: people like you). I can't offer much for you here other than to say you should try flying without NOAA. You must realize that you're bringing in more plugins to play with one another, and we are not magicians for everything here.