Author: Uri Blass
Date: 20:08:25 01/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2006 at 19:20:04, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 13, 2006 at 18:28:52, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 13, 2006 at 18:12:17, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On January 13, 2006 at 17:32:10, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On January 13, 2006 at 16:54:55, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 13, 2006 at 15:58:57, Robert Hollay wrote: >>>>> >>>>>Hi Robert, >>>>> >>>>>>Shareware. Test SMIRF free until 2006-01-31. >>>>> >>>>>the beta still shows to be intended to become shareware. But I am not sure >>>>>about that. There is no big interest facing those Rybka or top-engine hype. >>>>>About since a year there repeatedly have been unrestricted beta versions, >>>>>limited in lifetime to secure vanishing of old beta prereleases. But the echo >>>>>has been very small and only one person asked, how to purchase a full version. >>>>> >>>>>>What will happen after that date? >>>>> >>>>>The beta version still could be tested, but the program would answer nearly >>>>>immediately then, not reaching higher thinking levels, nag screens included. >>>>> >>>>>>I looked around the SMIRF site, but didn't quite understand it's licencing >>>>>>model. Part of the text is written in German, especially the shareware licence. >>>>>>What should we do to get it permanently? >>>>> >>>>>A sold / donated version would have texts also translated into English. >>>>> >>>>>SMIRF is now in a stage, where it should be rewritten completely to dense its >>>>>data structure and to incoorporate made experiences. I am against open source >>>>>programs for end-user applications like a chess engine. Arguing for that had >>>>>raised a banning from the most visited german chess forum. I think, that >>>>>freeware chess programs are dumping the whole scene, killing any respect and >>>>>refund of creative programmers. >>>> >>>>It is correct that free chess programs clearly make it harder for programmers to >>>>make money from chess engines but it seems to be also correct that free chess >>>>programs help to improve the level of the best programs. >>> >>>I doubt this very much. >>> >>>There would never have been any money in mediocre chess engines with or without >>>free ones. I believe that free engines stimulate the market. In fact, I am >>>pretty sure I would never have bought any professional engines if it were not >>>for the free ones to get me interested in them. >>> >>>Suppose that there are no free engines. Your program will still have to beat >>>Junior, Shredder, Fritz, CM, etc. to be interesting as far as strength goes. >>> >>>And if you try to sell on features you will need a snazzy interface and a good >>>database and hundreds of thousands of dollars for marketing. >>> >>>I think that the engines like Deep Sjeng, Ruffian, Rybka, Ktulu, etc. would not >>>sell at all if it were not for the hobbyist market created by people who cruise >>>forums like this one. >> >>I disagree here. >> >>Deep Sjeng and ruffian and Ktulu probably do not have many buyers because >>correspondence players who want to buy only the best 2 engines do not buy it >>when rybka may have more buyers than all of Deep Sjeng,Ruffian and Ktulu. > >So how will a weaker amateur engine figure into this mix? How will the >existance of these engines cause problems? > >I doubt if any of the non-Chessbase non-ChessAssistant non-Chessmaster engines >have sold more than 3000 or will sell more than 10,000 in their lifetimes. In >any case, the lack of sales has nothing to do with amateur engines and >everything to do with advertizeing, shelf space, etc. > >> I get if you ask Lokasoft, almost all of his sales will >>>go to people who he recognized the names of (just a guess). >>> >>>>There was a long time with little improvement when shredder dominated and top >>>>programmers could not improve their program even by 50 elo per year and suddenly >>>>we find some programs that are better than shredder(rybka,commercial fruit and >>>>fritz and probably hiarcs and the toga1.1 that is based on fruit). >>> >>>The improvement always goes in jumps and starts. The introduction of Junior was >>>like that. Junior came out of nowhere as an amateur engine to be the best in >>>the world. >> >>Junior never leaded the ssdf and I know no rating list with many games when it >>leaded. > >Incorrect. I think it may have won more than once, but here is one of its >winning lists: >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/2640/ssdf/2000/ssdf0001.htm Ok I apologize and I was wrong here but it leaded it only for a short time and by a small difference. Rybka is leading rating lists by bigger difference. > >It also won the world championship 3 times: >http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/wcc-comp.htm I know it but the point is that the improvement now is bigger than the improvement in previous years. > >> It was fairly similar for Chess Tiger (which occupied the SSDF top >>>spot for a short while). So Rybka is not an exception. I guess that a careful >>>examination of all the big movers and shakers will show that Rybka is the rule. >> >>I think that rybka is clearly an exception if you compare it to programs of >>2003-2005 > >Fruit. No Fruit commercial version was less than 50 elo better than shredder When Rybka64 bit has bigger difference from the second place based on rating lists. > >>There was only little improvement of less than 50 elo from shredder7.04 to >>shredder9 when the improvement from shredder9 to rybka1.2 is probably going to >>be more than 100 elo. > >Fruit from 0.98 to 2.2.1 is about 300 Elo in less than 2 years. This is irrelevant because I compare with the top programs and not with an old version. >I guess that in 2 years more Fabien can add 150 more if he wants to put in the >effort. I agree but my point is not about future fruit but about comparing the progress today and in the past. Today it is clear that there is a bigger progress. Uri
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.