Author: Adam Oellermann
Date: 09:44:22 11/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 15, 2001 at 19:01:13, Dann Corbit wrote: >On November 15, 2001 at 18:51:18, Slater Wold wrote: > >>On November 15, 2001 at 17:31:55, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On November 15, 2001 at 17:19:24, Slater Wold wrote: >>>[snip] >>>>If MS takes Chessbase, Chessmaser, Rebel, and Chess Assistance's share of the >>>>market, it would be *very* worthwhile. >>> >>>That would actually be just about the most tragic thing that could possibly >>>happen. >>> >>>If they expand the market by raising awareness, that would be OK. >>> >>>ChessBase and ChessAssistant are chess database products. That is very >>>different from a chess program. >> >>Yea? So? What stops them from adding all the features of CA and CB into their >>engine? Thus making it more worthwhile to buy it. > >First of all, they cannot possibly incorporate the features of a chess database >into a chess engine. They perform completely different functions. What does a >chess engine do to help you study chess opening theory, for instance? > >If they are to make a full-featured chess database system, it will take years to >get it market ready. You are talking about going from 200K lines of code to >several million. > >The only way a chess database from MS will come out in the next year is if they >purchase a system from someone. Or if they produce a partially functional one. >The second is highly improbable, since they would be soundly panned by chess >software reviewers like Bob Pawlack, and become a laughing stock over it. That's essentially what they did with IE - the first two versions were really lame by comparison to the others, but they just kept iterating the feature set quickly. - Adam
This page took 0 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.