Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 14:20:10 02/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
The point is the sheer size of the jump from one kind of hardware to another. Of course I know, as everydoby else, about improvements due to equipment, but this one is so large that, looking things from a reverse point of view, It could be said that the negative jump from a very fast hardware to a more average one is too great. And if the negative jump is too great, then I have certain ground to consider that when the product was commercially released they did not put enough concern in how the thing was going to run in an average kind of machine proper of the average consummer, even in CCC. Or to say again in another way: delivery was premature at the cost of the purchaser. My idea is that even in chess programming, as in fact practically does almost every company of programmer, you ensure that the release will be enough good for the average machine proper of time. That's the reason that we, with machines from 90 to 800 Mhz, all can say this or that product is very good, etc, although recognizing that with the fastest one is better. The point is they give us something good even when running in no so fast equipment. So we not complain about Tiber or Rebel on the ground that they only run OK when loaded in a 1,2 Giga monster. I hope my point is clear, Mogens Fernando
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.