Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:25:49 10/29/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 1998 at 02:57:44, Micheal Cummings wrote: >On October 28, 1998 at 14:43:34, Thomas Schultze wrote: > >>Anyone who ever has Chessmaster 6000 it is the best new Chess Program out on the >>market for an affordable price. It has International Master Josh Waitzkin >>anntonating his games. Also Bruce Pandolfini guides his chess teachings once >>again. Buy this game as soon as possible. > >CM6000 is a very good buy for someone not willing to pay the money for a more >expensive and higher rating program, for the serious chess player CM6000 as a >tool that has alot of short commings. But for a player who is looking to enjoy >his chess more visually on their computer, then yes CM6000 is an excellent >program, but for a serious player, I would think only a passing interest this >program would make. The strength difference between Fritz/Rebel10 and CM6000 is probably negligible. Serious chess players are a microscopic fraction of the market. The January 1998 FIDE database lists 20,982 members total. Chessmaster sold 4 million copies of CM5500. So if all the serious players in the world bought a copy of a serious program, then 190 times as many buy a consumer one. If you are a developer, which market do you want? Furthermore, I'll bet most truly serious players have a bunch of programs, including the consumer type products. Why not look at the analysis they can produce also? It may, at times, be superior to the analysis of the pricier models. Your other remarks about data storage are more on target. But CM5500 lets you find (for instance) games played by Bobby Fisher, or Tal, or whatever. The more esoteric functions offered by superior programs are nice only to the serious players. Of which there are not very many. Really, it takes incredible nerve to even call what CM5500 has a database. It's not. (Don't know about CM6000). I bought CM5500, and I probably won't buy CM6000 unless they fix all the screw-ups in the product. That does not mean that the software is not properly targeted. Competition from the low end can be good. It can force high end products to distinguish themselves by providing superior features. I see the database arena as potential for spectacular growth. The current database tools, even the high end ones, are lame. This will change for the better, to enable truly serious study of the game to be performed much more easily. Annotation is an area that can be greatly improved also. Most current annotation functions are not worth the powder to blow them up with. A tremendous potential for growth here also. If programs can play at 2500 level, then why do they annotate at 1500 level? I would like to see a better display metaphor. The tree concept is nice, and I especially like the format chosen by Peter Klausler in CDB. But why not show a set of boards as the various choices instead of only one at a time, and also show the repercussions of the choice on the new boards at the same time?
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.