Author: odell hall
Date: 23:18:50 11/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 1999 at 02:07:16, David Blackman wrote: >On November 14, 1999 at 00:53:54, odell hall wrote: > >> >> >> Would someone please explain to me the psychology or motivations behind >>programmers who refuse to make their program available to the public. > >In my case it's because my program just isn't good enough, and there might be a >bit of embarrasment if i released it. At its best a few years ago it was almost >as good as Crafty, but Crafty has improved since then and my program apparently >hasn't. You're probably more interested in the really good programs that aren't >available. I haven't "been there", but i think i've been close enough to guess >at the reasons. > >First thing, you have to decide if you want to sell it as a whole program, sell >it as an engine, or give it away for free. > >Giving it away is easiest, because you don't have to meet market expectations >for user interface quality, or for anything else really. But if you have a >strong attachment to your program, and it's good, it would be very upsetting to >see other people attempting to sell it claming they wrote it themselves. Just >ask Bob. Also i suspect a lot of people are not giving their programs away for >free, or are only giving away crippleware demos or old versions, because they >have hopes of eventually selling the program commercially. > >Selling it as an engine for an existing user interface is the next easiest >option. In fact for new chess engines entering the market now, this may be the >only real option. This approach has a few problems though. There would be tricky >negotiations over contracts. You would have to actually make the program work >under the interface, which would be a significant amount of work. You would then >have to do a lot of testing, and try to make sure the interface isn't crippling >your program in some subtle way. > >Selling as a complete program would be really difficult. The existing user >interfaces on the market are really good, and it would be difficult to build >something competitive that wasn't a complete rip-off of something already out >there. > >Looking at all the options, you can give it away which is easy to do, but some >people wouldn't find that very rewarding. Or you can sell it, which involves a >lot of hard work even if the engine is already good. Selling it doesn't >guarantee you a lot of money, and even the most successful chess programmers are >probably only making a decent income from it. Are Franz Morsch and Ed Shroeder >filthy rich? > >Most of the chess programmers out there have day jobs, or some other source of >income. If you go commercial, chess programming becomes like a second job, with >an uncertain income, and for most people that's no fun. On the other hand if > it's just a hobby, you can do as little or as much work as you like and enjoy >yourself. Thanks for sharing these views, apparently there are many decisions and facts which programmers are faced with that I was unaware of! On the surface to someone who does not understand the business, it looks like they are just being selfish. I assumed that good chess programmers made a decent living, then from my point of view I thought they were simply wasting talent and opportunity.
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.