Well, in the interest of equal time for the opposing viewpoint, I'll chirp up to say my Ariane 737 X2 for FSX is one of my favorite airplanes and has a whole lot going for it, not the least of which it rolls through FSX on oiled ball bearings, so frame rates are a non-issue.  It is pricey and you do have to pay for liveries, although they have a decent single package with a world-wide sampling.

Ariane is one of those companies people love to hate, which I admit to feeling some sympathy for.  They have done more than their share to bring it on themselves in the past.  Based on my experience with their X2 for FSX, I'd have to say they are doing a good job, now.  But when you do buy repaints you are getting interior changes, too, as well as appropriate thrust ratings, i.e. you are buying specific airplanes, not just skins.  Not to mention the repains are by McPhat, which is nice.

But, like I said, it is pricey and you do have to pay for repaints.  And that, by the way, is probably the wave of the future for those who want the very best in specularity and bump maps, the sort of thing that is beyond the abilities of most of us.  If you can build a kit and push up toward 300 pixels per meter and spend the time bumping every rivet, chip and ripple, then you are indeed technically expert and talented.  Of course, there will always be talented people who will work with the stock kit, as we've already seen with the 767.  (And how!)  Without a team working on a UHDT project, though, you are going to have months and months of work ahead of you.  Now, if I had the ability to do that, I would probably consider that time well spent, but I don't.

Personally, I'm willing to pay for liveries, especially if they are to McPhat standards as exhibited in the new AAL for the Super 80.  Given a choice between flying a very nice standard livery and a 280 pixel per meter show pony that cost me a few bucks, I'm probably going to go with the latter to get the most out of my limited hobby time, at least for a few favorites.