Granted, I am ready for everyone to say "THIS DOESNT LOOK AS GOOD AS FSX!"... Thats just cuz your jealous of my FS2004 
Nice pics Slade
, From some of the vantage points you chose you made it hard to tell, especially with the editing.
With all due respect before you go nuts thinking I am dissing your screen shots, because i'm not, take those same sceneries you posted pics of, like the Kai Tak one, then take the same snap shot of it using the FSX version, re-edit them like you did in the FS9 pics and it will look even better, that's just the way it is. :-) There's no way to fake higher resolution, higher poly scenery/aircraft models, and more autogen per square area.
Now, i'm not saying your pics dont look good, because they do look good, they look great and your a master of editing with the extra photoshop enhancements, but you can only go so far with FS9 as far as texture resolution, etc. Umberto has been over all the things he can do extra in the FSX versions that he can't do in the FS9 versions due to FS9's limitations.
Take any of the FSDT airports, then take an "unedited" screen shot of it in FS9, then do the same for FSX. From experience I will say the FSX versions all look better since I have them installed in both sims. The same will most likely hold true for any scenery that is available for both sims. GEX is a good example for a "blanket" product that covers the whole US/Europe vs. GE Pro for FS9 that covers the whole world. I think it goes without saying that the higher res GEX textures look much better and sharper than the GE Pro ones do for FS9.
Sure FS9 can look good, especially in some areas, like the old KPDX by Vauchez, but I will wager that when the ORBX fellows finish the area it will look 10x better than what Vauchez put together 5 or 6 years ago.
The problem is, we can't fly in FS9 with it being photoshopped while we fly to make it look like your screen shots.
If that were the case I might not have jumped ship to FSX so quick.
Thats just cuz your jealous of my FS2004
No way, sorry.
I think I made my point.
Frankly, the only point you made to me is that your sour because of the possibility FSDT might not be able to continue FS9 developement.
Hey, its understandable, no one here is knocking FS9, well maybe a little, but what I mean is that not everyone has the resources to upgrade their rig to FSX standards. If I were the position of having spent a boat load of money on FS9 stuff and didn't have the financial resources to upgrade my computer and repurchase all my addons, I too would probably be a little bummed if one of my favorite vendors said they maybe unable to produce products for my sim. Then again some people may have the resouces but for whatever reason dont want to switch, fair enough, but then you suffer the consequence of having your sim left behind at some point by some developers.
The thing is, nothing last forever. Just because vendors slowing might start making FSX only products doesn't mean that your FS9 is going to stop working. In fact, for FS9 there is so much content as far as a/c and sceneries available for it, plus all the freeware, if no one ever made another FS9 product for years you guys would still be sitting pretty. Granted some of the airports might be a little out of date as far as newer runways or terminals.
I'm sure 3 or 4 years from now, all of us FSX guys will be bellyaching also that some developers will not be able to continue to make FSX products because they are too hard to backport from the Flight version or whatever the new or hot sim is at the moment. If you think things are getting bad for FS9 now, just wait another 3 or 4 years and it will most likely be much worse.
Anways, since this is the "LAX Backdoor", lets get back to LAX and look forward to it.
Regards.
