Author: Howard Exner
Date: 18:22:57 01/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 1999 at 14:53:18, KarinsDad wrote: >IMO (for what it is worth), I think Microsoft could do a good job creating a >"better chess program". I also think that most people here will disagree with me >on this topic, hence, I think that if you created a poll question on this, most >of the people would probably indicate that Microsoft could not create a much >better chess program. > >My reasoning for why MS could do better is as follows: > >1) Knowing several Microsoft engineers and listening to them, I have come to >realize that there are a lot of bright development engineers there. Obviously, >there are exceptions to this rule, but I think that they have the talent to >build a better mousetrap (or chess engine). > >2) There is a lot of information on the Internet currently (and in books and the >ICCA journal, etc.) that would enable them to catch up fairly quickly, possibly >as quickly as 9 to 12 months. > >3) Microsoft has a lot of resources, money, high speed equipment, and talent. This observation may be the key to posing a quess as to whether Microsoft would improve upon present day programs. With all their money/resources would they start from scratch or would they look around the chess programming community and hire those individuals that currently do such programming? If there preference would be to round up the current programmers out there then the polling question could also be phrased, "if the current crop of chess programmers (professional or non-professional) were provided with the MS resources would their software improve at a greater rate than presently? >Just look at what IBM did with Deep Blue. With Microsoft's money, they could >purchase the source for Deep Blue, reverse engineer it, and improve upon it. >They could also hire some of the original Deep Thought/Deep Blue engineers and >possibly even other engineers from other chess engines. > >So, Microsoft has the resources to create a better chess program. There is no >doubt (in my mind) of this. However, they will not ever do it since there is no >market share (from their perspective). Hence, my thought is that we all know the >answer to the question. We may disagree on it due to likes or dislikes of >Microsoft, but the bottom line is: 50 talented engineering programmers with a >lot of high speed equipment can reverse engineer and research current technology >in any computer subject and do a good (if not great) job of improving upon it >within 2 years. I agree with your observations. > >KarinsDad > >PS. I think that the current level of chess program technology is actually quite >sophisticated. However, it can be improved upon (as is seen by the fact that the >programs get just a little bit better every year). > > >On January 05, 1999 at 03:45:13, Lawrence S. Tamarkin wrote: > >>I recently met a former Microsoft department head, who is now a chess coach and >>using many of the availble playing programs, databases & tutorials. What he >>told me I found truly amazing! He said that the currently availble programs >>were from a programming point of view rather unsophisticated and trivial in >>design. He suggested that if Microsoft (or other large software maker), decided >>to get involved in creating these things, the results would (or at least could), >>blow away the currently existing things in the marketplace. >> >>Honestly, I think he is wrong about this, but I certainly would like to see a >>poll question about it, to see what other's think. >> >>mrslug - the inkompetent chess software addict! >> >>
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.