On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:11:53 +0200, Erik Hofman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alex Perry wrote: > > I don't recall seeing this go past previously; if it has, my > > apologies. > > > > I've just been reading the April 2003 issue of EAA's Sport Aviation > > magazine and pages 50 through 58 are a nice article titled "Virtual > > Building" about"Flight simulation for the homebuilder" by Chuck > > Bodeen. It includes a discussion comparing the benefits of > > FlightGear, X-plane-0.66 and MSFS2002. > > Good grief, > > A comparison between FlightGear *and* MSFS *and* X-plane. > This and David's post give me the feeling we're on the right track! > > Any conclusion on FlightGear? ..a "con" is Microsoft is sponsoring EAA, so we "have" to beat MSFS where it hurts the most, on merits. ;-) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
