Which do you prefer and why?

FSX+acceleration. higer performance and realism

I switched to FSX mostly for the aircraft selection. Granted there were a lot of great versions for FS9, but they also work in FSX (with a little tweaking)

Terrain such as Orbx, FSDreamteam and GEX/UTX also.

Autogen! Lots and lots and lots of autogen!

Also, cool new feature possibilities on aircraft.

Did you really say "higher performance" with a straight face?

FSX = Better graphics and more realism

The terrain, down low, is much better in FSX. It's just awful in FS9. I like the way you move around in the cockpit, as you manuever the airplane, too. The whole experience is just much more realistic and immersive for me. After just a few minutes of flying it, I knew that FS9 had to go.

My most important airport scenery never got ported to FSX. That's a deal breaker for me.

Actually FS9 loaded with scenery,terrain, sky/clouds, and water enhancements looks damn good, people. I agree with those who say FSX has a superior feeling of flight dynamics, wind buffeting, etc. out of the box. I also prefer the reprsentation of water out of the box, when comparing the two. It's not even close. If you have a DX10 vid card and Vista/Win7, and check DX10 preview in FSX, the difference is even greater. But I actually prefer FS9's stock flight "missions" better than FSX's. The only solution, then, is to have both.

Exactly. When writing for PC Pilot I end up flipping back and forth between the two. FSX has yet to have a King Air B200 that approaches the quality of the Aeroworx B200, so I have to use FS9 when writing articles that use that airplane. Overall I like FSX out of the box better...but most people are using heavily modded FS9 installs which evens things up a bit.

BeachAV8R