Author: Don Dailey
Date: 12:47:24 06/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 1998 at 13:10:12, Don Prohaska wrote: >Ah, yes, phoney claims to make a sale. But, take a look at what computer >companies do with ratings today. Perhaps 80 percent of the people that >would buy a chess program have a P\90 or less (I don't know this as a >fact). So Rebel might rate highest on a P\90, but Socko blows Rebel away >on its P3\650. The testers claim Socko is tops. I buy Socko to use with >my P\70 and my brother using an old 486 blows me away with his Rebel. >Now, computer companies know that the general population can't stay up >with the latest compter (regardless of what KK thinks :}}} ) Isn't that >the same as claiming ratings the most likely buyer will never see? A >programmer will always want to test his product against the competition >using the best and latest hardware. And if he does well, he'll brag. And >he'll advertise! Nothing wrong with that. We know that some companies >lie, exagerate, cheat, etc, to sell a product. There are at least two >large software companies that sell chess software that are full of real >bugs, and I hear very little complaint. Some companies with fine >products will hawk there products and perhaps exagerate, like calling >there product the "Absolute World Champion" when no one really knows >what that means. Except the beginner who must learn the hardway. > >I hope this sounds the way I meant it to. As long as the hardware is clearly and prominently specified, this is not a problem, the public has to be trusted to make some decisions correctly. When I compare two programs I take these factors into consideration and I think most others do to. If I see Rebel on top with a Pentium 500 MHZ screamer I will not compare it to MCHESS running on a 386. (This is an example, not based on anything I actually saw, so no flames please.) I think it's basically that simple! If a new rating organization comes to be, I only ask that every detail is clearly published so that we can make our own rational decisions. Even if the methodology is screwed up (like not counting time forfeits) having complete documenation and knowing this will give us all the data we need to draw our own conclusions. - Don
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.