Author: KarinsDad
Date: 19:08:43 01/09/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 09, 1999 at 09:25:23, blass uri wrote: > >On January 09, 1999 at 06:23:08, Micheal Cummings wrote: > >> >>On January 08, 1999 at 20:07:06, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>If Microsoft devoted substantial resources to the creation of a chess playing >>>program, and devoted one year to the project, how would that program compare (in >>>terms of playing strength only) to the best professional chess playing programs >>>on today's market? >>> >>>** >>> >>>What is the point of this poll question? In a sense, IBM has already done this. The point of the poll question is that it is a controversial topic (hence, all of the posts on it). Additionally, nobody else suggested another poll question. >>> >>>If the point of this question were to mean the chess program must be run on a >>>desktop computer, the results would still be the same. It would be better then >>>the other professional chess programs, if that would be the goal for Microsoft. >>> >>>For Microsoft, substantial resources would mean millions of dollars, a team of >>>programmers, a team of computer chess experts (ex. Bob Hyatt), and a team of >>>high rated professional chess players. All working together to meet the goal. >>> >>>With that kind of resources I don’t think the goal of just topping, the best >>>professional chess programs in terms of playing strength currently out would be >>>much of a challenge. >> >>I would like to know one thing, why would Microsoft want to invest the time and >>money to create a chess program. There are no reasons for them to do it. The poll question was "If". >> Its not as though it is big market. Plus what >>are we going to need to run this program, I suggest with the millions of dollars >>invested that the program would be graphically power hungry along with the power >>and memory to then go and run the chess engine. >> >>I woulds suggest 128 Ram, PII450. 16Meg 2D graphics Card. >> >>I think too many people when hearing this will jump on the bandwagon thinking >>that a big company will create a powerful program, This from a company who takes >>2 years over to release operating systems and even when they do is full of bugs. >> >>Its like Deep Blue, used on a super computer > >I do not think that IBM payed to the right people to help them. Why not? Kasparov is still complaining about it. Sounds like they were successful to me. You can almost always get better people, but you shouldn't argue with success. > > >>, I do not think Microsoft would >>create a program more powerful than the others on the market. Not unless it was >>used on a future PII 850 and the rest were running on a PII 450. > >They would not do it only because they do not want to do it. > >I think that they can do a better program and I explained it in other posts >about this subject. > >It is only a question of money. > >Uri
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.