Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 10:21:07 06/26/98
Go up one level in this thread
Hi steve: Great idea, a funny one. If I were to begin with this, I will recall two programs by Chris W. Although I love very much CSTAL, the full meaning of his publicity as something that play as Tal would do, is, to say the less, deceiving. Before, the Complete Chess System that I bought in London talked in his box of a first place in a tournament that never was held. Fernando Of course, there are lot more examples, many of them current stuff. On June 26, 1998 at 11:45:17, Steven Schwartz wrote: >On June 26, 1998 at 09:33:49, Bert Seifriz wrote: > >>Now somehow I do not trust those ChessMaster numbers, sorry. But even when you >>divide them by 10 ChessMaster would still be another 10 times ahead of Fritz >>worldwide. (In Germany ChessMaster is definitely not a bestseller though!) >>It would in fact be also interesting to know more about other programs like >>M-Chess, Shredder, Nimzo, CS-Tal, Virtual, Zarkov, Hiarcs etc. etc. That they >>all together have only a market share of 5 percent is not at all realistic >>compared with our numbers. But no manufacturer will give you his numbers, so >allcomes down to fortune telling. And for the statistics in CSS you could cite >the Italian proverb: Si non e vero, e bon trovato. If it is not true it is at least well made up. >>Bert/gambitsoft.com > >Chessmaster claims remind me of the former claims of McDonalds. >They used to shout from every sign in front of every McDonalds >"Over 20 Billion Sold" (and every week they would change the >sign to reflect the new, higher numbers). > >Every time there is a new Chessmaster, there is a new "Number >Sold" proclaimed on the box (in the millions instead of billions, >ostensibly, I believe, because more people eat hamburgers than >play chess - at least in the U.S. :-)). Who is counting???? >Who is auditing that count???? > >Based upon my experience, commercial software (Chessmaster, >Extreme, Virtual, Grandmaster, Expert, etc.) is 95% of the U.S. >market in numbers sold (perhaps 90% in monies spent). > >Our current Opinion Poll on what software we possess is very >interesting, but, to a great degree, reflects almost entirely >the "serious" chess player who is a member of CCC, and it does >not at all take into the account the vast majority of chess >players who buy chess software - the people who come into our >store from off the street. These people would rather spend $30 >on a program that will beat them every time they play it than >on a program that costs $100 and will beat them every time >they play it. > >I have seen 20 years of creative chess advertising. I just got >off the phone with a customer who purchased from us an Atlanta >(stand-alone) based upon a current U.S. Chess Federation ad >proclaiming a "2280+ Swedish ELO program". While he was on the >phone, I called up the SSDF list but could find the Atlanta nowhere. >Then I realized that the text said a 2280+ *PROGRAM*!?! Ah, so >perhaps this "program" was running on very fast hardware and wound >up with a 2280+ rating, but that has nothing to do with the Atlanta >and its processor! Not to mention that the claim flies in the >face of the Federation's own policy not to advertise ANY rating >unless it is their "official" rating. > >Not a year has gone by without many instances of such >"creative advertising". It is a shame. Perhaps, we can start >a CCC Shameful Advertising Hall of Fame. I know, as a retailer, >I may be opening a Pandora's Box, but it would be interesting >to read CCC member's nominations for specific chess ad claims >from the distant past up to the present that deserve entry >into the SAHF. > >-Steve - ICD/Your Move - icdchess.com
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.