I don't know; even though there are more additions to flight simulator 2004, I find it to be less troublesome to just uninstall 2004 and reinstall 2002.  You'd think the designers of this program would take into account the difference between the two systems and software associated with both, and incorporate the differences into a compatible product.  Flight simulator 2004 has been out for quite some time and yet there's still no patch available to fix the many problems which exist.  All the problems from comm w/ ATC, panel & discrepancies with missing aircraft parts, up to the large multitude of other problems encountered by simmers is just plain inconvenient and for now, a monumental waste of money!!      

Yes Sir, I understand where you're coming from -- but when I purchased 2002, I don't think I encountered more than one problem.  My current situation with some aircraft renders them unusable if I rely on the 2004 version.

Rick

The problem is, there is no one "designer".
The FS teasm is relatively small and many (most?) parts of FS are contracted out (it`s much cheaper) and aparently thrown together at the last minute while MS hopes for the best.

FS has always been known as a "cash cow" for MS meaning that FS has always had steady stream, of willing purchasers no matter how many bugs it had.

Then there is the FS comunity in general who often views MSFS as some sort of gift from MS and it`s not to be critisized or else MS will stop developing it.
This is absolute BS of course as MSFS has alwas been a top selling title and there isn`t much chance MS will abandon it no matter how much people complain.

So, the only hope is that a program like X-Plane will gain populariry and slowly get better, forcing MS to realize that the cow is drying up and they better pay attention to QC!

Codered,
I know you're not even serious with that company man response.  What bugs?  Obviously you have some catching-up to do in reading what everybody's saying in this forum.

As far as the implication of not appreciating what MS has done by creating this game, I commend them just the same.  I just think in retrospect, they've done a better job on past versions in terms of keeping up with what's compatible with what.  There are a lot of things that slipped through the cracks on this one -- Major improvements nevertheless, but there are a lot of simple annoying things that just don't work right.  As a paying customer, and a diehard patron of flight Sim, I believe I have the right to voice my opinion.
 
Rickster2

That's with your panels sir....besides I don't have to give you a list, you have a whole website forum full of 'em.  Why don't we just drop it!  Of coarse you guys with the 4 and five stars next to your names are side by side and have to be supportive. As far as the system thing, my computer is brand new, fast and has lots of memory.   

Closed case!

Anybody who has a 'new', 'fast' PC that's set up right with good, compatible component parts and peripherals, has done a good clean install and takes trouble maintaining their system IMO should have no problems running this sim.

I for one would not want to buy or run a 'new' prog such as this from any supplier that was geared to PCs of 2 or more years ago. They are technically obsolete. Fact. Sorry. I would expect a prog like FS9 which is very feature rich to be geared to state of the art machine capability. That is what technical progress is all about.

The designers have tried to accomodate 'old' technology by giving you sliders. You turn em down if you have an old machine and you lose features. If you want to turn em up you have to trade in your old PC.

I can't afford a Ferrari - I make do with my Honda. I know I don't get the same performance as a Ferrari owner but I don't bitch.

Will- that wasn't aimed at you mate