Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 12:59:39 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 15:52:15, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On April 29, 2002 at 15:28:56, Roy Eassa wrote: > >[snip] > >Quoted completely out of context - on purpose: >> So I wouldn't necessarily lump DOS together with Mac. > >Me neither. =) > > >>Quite a few companies (still) make good money selling Mac programs. As there >>are relatively few professional-grade chess programs on the Mac (at least >>compared to Windows), one great app might sell pretty well. (Or maybe not. I >>really don't know!) > >I can see 2 reasons: > >(a) Under Windows you have the "framework" of Fritz you can base your engine on. >At least I think it's something like that. Ie the engine author doesn't have to >write its own interface but can use the Fritz-interface. > I guess I assumed (hoped?) that the existing Hiarcs Mac GUI was designed to be quite separate from the playing engine, allowing the latter to be upgraded independently. At least that's the way I'd try to do it. >(b) Support >I guess that the cost to provide at least basic support for a platform, you need >more money than to port the core of the engine. Also, you need at least one >persons who's familiar with the target platform in your support team which maybe >is not that easy. > That is indeed a BIG issue for most companies and I assume would be for Hiarcs too. >But these reasons are just wild guesses at best, from my POV. I don't expect >Chessbase or engine authors to state the reasons, but maybe a sales person (in >another area) could shed some light on this? > >Sargon
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.