Author: KarinsDad
Date: 12:59:51 01/06/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 1999 at 15:25:33, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >On January 06, 1999 at 15:06:29, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: > [snip] >>No argument here. MS has always made some of the very best development tools. >>But this also goes to something I mentioned, in a way. Compiler design and >>optimization are pretty arcane and complex subjects, much like chess >>programming. >> >>Ask the development team how long they've been doing compiler stuff. My guess is >>that many of them will say 'A long time'. Take a group of application >>programmers, with no experience in compiler stuff except, perhaps, for a >>compiler design course in college. How long do you think it will take to ramp up >>to being as good as the current VC++ team? My guess is that it would take quite >>a while. Maybe a couple of years. Until then, they won't be writing world-class >>compilers. After that, they'll be competitive. >> >>Take this same group of talented engineers and programmers, and throw them into >>the chess programming group. I feel that it would take them a similar amount of >>time to ramp up to the point where they'd be producing state of the art code. In >>2 years, perhaps they'll be hanging with Ed and Bob, but until then, I feel they >>won't be as good. >> >>I feel that it is the nature of the beast. Has nothing to do with MS or anyone >>else; it simply takes significant amounts of time to get very good in a complex, >>advanced field like compiler design or chess programming. And until you reach >>that point, you really can't add much to the 'state of the art'. >> >>Chris > >We differs in the following: you insist that *all* members of the >team must have previous experience. I think that for the small >group (say, 5 developers or less) *leader(s)* must have a lot >of experience. Of course it'll help if other team members will >have some experience, too, but that's not necessary. It can be >replaced by good organization - and MS has an excellent >traditions here. > >So, in our hypothetical situation, MS must go and hire one or >two best people in the field. All other team can be found inside >MS itself. Exactly that was done in the past - VMS people were >hired as leaders for NT development, database people were hired >as leaders for SQL Server 7.0 development, etc. > >Eugene I've gotta agree with Eugene here. Here's the team: Bob, team lead: $750,000 a year salary ($100,000 plus $650,000 based on results) 2 other strong chess programmers of Bob's choice: $500,000 a year salary ($75K/$425K, but don't tell them Bob's max bonus) 2 strong GMs with a little programming and chess programs experience: $75K, no bonus, but the option to go off and play in tournaments 3 months out of the year. 4 very strong Microsoft engineers who may have an interest in this area (no change in salary) A support team of testers, technical writers, etc. I'd hate to put my chess program up against anything these guys put out. Hypothetically speaking of course. :) KarinsDad
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.