[Chris]

..möchte ich Euch nicht vorenthalten, denn ich hatte das Glück, es eben gerade noch lesen zu können, bevor es kommentarlos gelöscht wurde (IE-Cache sei Dank).
Dabei geht es mir nicht darum, hier irgendeine Hetze gegen PSS zu starten, sondern nur mal in Frage zu stellen, warum gerade auch solche, zugegebenermaßen auch recht kritische Stellungnahmen nicht mal seitens PSS zum Anlass genommen werden, etwas dazu zu sagen, anstatt sie zu löschen.
Natürlich muss man bei diesem Posting auch hinterfragen, ob es nicht aus taktischen Gründen ins Forum gestellt wurde. Ich verstehe nur nicht, warum Löschen oft nur die einizge Antwort von PSS bleibt:

">Airbus<"
I'm a bit disturbed by the attitude taken by the PSS team regarding questions about specific features of the pending Airbus release.
Questions regarding included features, the functionality of such features, etc. are being replied to with "wait until you see the final product, then ask."

Maybe I'm reading this the wrong way, but to me, this sounds like "send us your money, and ask questions later." That is not an attitude that I like to see, or expect to see, from a reputable publisher. As a paying customer, I'd prefer to just hear the honest answer to the question, rather than seeing a very vague response, and the thread locked.

Without further ado, please allow me to answer a few of them.

Regarding performance. I've talked to a number of FS'ers who've seen this panel/aircraft combo in action the last couple of days (PSS appears to have a leak somewhere), and every single person I've talked to has said that performance with this package is abysmal.

One friend running a Pentium 4 2.0Ghz machine with 1GB RAM and and a 64MB Geforce3 DDR card reported that the panel sutters and frames to the point where it's unflyable. A comparison test this person performed showed the A320 panel acheiving frame rates of 4 to 5 FPS in default Microsoft scenery, while the 767 panel included with PIC was averaging over 35 FPS.

Regarding functionality. None of the FS'ers who have used this panel (which include some very well known names, I might add) are pleased with the functionality aspect. That is, the layout of the panel windows, etc. I realize that this is a matter of personal opinion, so let me preface the comments below by saying that.

The main problem with functionality is that everything in the panel is based off the IFR panel, which PSS for some reason has designed to allow no exterior view whatsoever. The MCDU and Overhead panels, for example, MUST be called up from this IFR panel, and cannot be called up from the VFR panel. This is very, very inconvenient when a change needs to be made while you actually need to see out the window. This absurd amount of window opening/closing/shifting/re-zooming isn't necessary in other panels of this caliber, and I'm not exactly sure why PSS felt it was necessary here.

Another problem with the VFR panel is that it's called up using the NumPad-2 key, so it's really a workaround in which FS2002 thinks you're looking backward, but with a forward view. "Big deal!" you say? Well it is..

With this programmed as it is, it is impossible to resize the exterior view window (which remains at full screen, even with the panel visible), making it nearly impossible to see anything out the window at more than a -5° pitch attitude. This can be overcome using the raise/lower seat function, but then perspective is totally shot.

It is also impossible to look left/right/forward-left/foward-right with the VFR panel, as again, FS2002 is seeing it as a rear-facing view, which is unmovable. Attempting to look any direction other than forward causes the IFR panel to pop up.. not good on a visual approach. The VFR panel must then be called back up, the raise/lower seat adjusted so you can actually see, and the approach carried out - provided you haven't impacted terra firma in a fireball at that point.

I realize that this post may be unappreciated by some, but I also realize that there are a number of you out there who have an itchy finger to give out your Credit Card number without hearing the 'other side' of things, or even seeing so much as a full-screen shot of the panel with a frames per second counter. I would strongly urge you guys to sit back for a few days after release, read the comments in this forum, and make an informed decision before you shell out more money for an addon than you did for the simulator itself.