Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 10:42:52 01/06/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 1999 at 10:26:59, Bert Seifriz wrote: >>>>>3) Microsoft has a lot of resources, money, high speed equipment, and talent. > >SNIP >>>right people (thinking that Microsoft wouldn't attempt to hire the best people >>>"in the field" who could start out running instead of crawling is naive) could >>>probably create some strong software in a short period of time. >>> >>>I believe that such a project would take a lot of resources and dedication, but >>>the US put a man on the moon in what, 8 years after Kennedy proposed it? >>> >>>Microsoft could probably have the strongest engine in the world in 2 years and >>>if they wanted to, > > >This is exactly the point. Why should Microsoft care to build a >chess engine? They do not have the slightest reason! >And if? They would either buy an existing company or >engage some of the chess programmers you already know. >After all why do you think the persons we know are in any >way inferior to a Microsoft engineer? >There are for example only a handful of persons in the world >who are able to program chess in assembly language! And these >are not MS engineers! Bert Sorry, but I'm absolutely sure that I *can* write reasonable good chess engine. Actually, I had done that 9 years ago (you can download Siberian Chess from GambitSoft chess site; engine was not modified after 1991, I think; and then I knew much less, had no access to Western publications/experience, etc). Yes, it was written mainly in C, only absolutely time-critical parts of it were in assembly (first 8080, later I rewrote in 8086). But if necessary, I can write engine in "100% pure assembly". And I'm Microsoft engineer :-) Eugene
This page took 0.01 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.