Three problems: tree overlap, significantly weaker engine (the CEGT 4/40 rating difference is 110 points), and the Fritz GUI. And I'd even have to pay for it!

I'd like to define 'use for Fritz 11' as something that could possibly be construed as being worth 50€.

But I'm sure  Kramnik would protest.
He would say Fritzy is drawish .
Therefore of the same strenght as him. 

> Using them on single core remains useful under many circumstances; see for examples:

I've also tried to bring those point in front, but have to face the fact that most members in this forum seems to be keen computerchess freaks, foremost ;)
That is, less interest in analysis with (human)chess in mind, preparation etc. Maybe the majority of those who cares for those parts is just being quiet?
I know that Vas has persuad the idea of Rybka being an super engine, and with the perspetive of a later GUI, for long. Then Covekta came in, and we, that the target is there :)
As very sweet "bi-effect" Rybka has proven extremely strong against the exsisting engines, which has caught the attention of those who's main interest is computerchess and those likes both cc and human chess where analysis is a concern. And just lately it seems, there begins to be a breakthrough, a connection, to the chessworld. And that's where ChesBase has dominated for year.

Still, back to cores and "ordinary" people (you've touched the subject yourself more than briefly, if I remember correctly, and so has Uri and others): These people is often playing in clubs or on the net, and seeks ways to improve their chess, they almost give a shit about CC-ratings, they foremost want what the other guy's having. And what that is can change. Regarding the computers, many I know, is cathegorieds in two rough groups: Those who knows they have a dual all by them self, something they aimed at, and those who've discovered they have a dual and need the term explained. In both cathegories, there's some knowledge, and the understanding varies a lot. Naturally.

But those who've aimed for a dual, usually wants to use one processor for chess analysis/game, and the other for "something else". They understand the significance of one vs two processors. In some cases, the thought of using both processes for an overnight analysis appeals, but often you need a special occasion, or being a pro chess player to legitimate that. The rest is most likely not interested, except when they've just bought a new program that yeilds it's "deep" analysis in some way.

Then there's the super-normals: They have dual, and dont care, or they have a typical household comp, maybe a new one (but still one cpu/tread): They don't care if there's a benefit im using 2 treads, even less when they're told how "much" this benefit is in time.

In both groups there's quite some who may buy just just the most expensive of everything, but still they would wonder why  a  program uses "both" cpu's when 1 is enough... I know a guy is buying Deep Fritz.... has done for years...He is an unormal "ordinary", changing harware often. Now he has dual-laptop, and the main problem is that when he uses Deep Fritz, everything is so slow, just like before... He is for many years a the IT-manager for a big company, with a substance of technicallity in his education.

My point is, that many buys computers and computers and software without more prior understanding than they have when buy TV or phones. It's superficial knowledge, and it will probably alwas be that way. No blaim here.
So the aim at any time, when the majority is clear on benefits and caveats in one area, like hardware, is of course to present the most desent product, with all the quallities to the typical user. But where? And who?

My personal guess, is that it will last long before the inital target audience of Rybka has more more than sp's - 3-5 years??
And still we'll like to use sp's because "diffence of oppinion" matters - some of us at least.

I hope the "market" wont milk the cow too much... adjusting to the circumstances woud seem too me, as bieng able to stop benefitting from mp in time. That's about two years from now, when looking at the Europeans, the USA and Asia.

> I don't know what you mean by this.  You have to buy the strength-enhancing feature, and this feature isn't available until next spring

Alright, alright. They've completely removed the availability of the strength-enhancing feature for marketing reasons! Happy? Makes no difference to anything I care about, though. Especially since they don't even have an upgrade price.

>The advertising was clear: with Fritz and Deep Fritz being separate engines, developed separately

How many times did you roll your eyes while typing that? In the real world (i.e. everywhere but the advertising), they're the exact same engine, the difference being that Deep Fritz is compiled with
#define SMP

Come what may, i still don't get why they aren't releasing an UCI version. IMO it's like accepting they are not a tough competitor in engine business and  they only rely on the goodwill factor of "Good GUI" which will also sell their engine to the unsuspecting, unexposed, under informed poor chess fans.

The fact is they can't ride this horse for too long. Sooner or later the trend will shift from legacy systems and they either had to prove fritz is the best engine or accept the fact and play equal in modern platform if they want to survive. We are already at the early stages of that shift in knowledge among chess users. It's just a matter time for others to get educated.

Just weight and watch the fun after that. :-)

I have a lot of respect for what they did to chess community for quiet a few years consistently. I got interested in chess computers only because of fritz and it's popularity like so many others. Thanks to their very good marketing team again. I used to have a fidelity designer 2100 when i was a kid and used to wonder how fritz 2 used to beat it left right and center in a modest 386/33Mhz machine :-)

Please don't think i am just here to thrash fritz. I would love to see fritz come back big like any other chess engine, which is always good for the chess world.  

All that said and done, there is only one thing that bothers me, they don't have the stuff they are trying to sell and that makes us look like a fool in their hands. That sounds like a rip off. Moreover i always felt they had total domination over computer chess world at one point with top 5-6 engines as their product. This kind of monopoly is not good for chess industry.

Why?? Like Quapsel said this can be easily understood with MS analogy if you think a bit. (Again don't get me wrong, i respect both Bill and Steve equally). In todays world quality matters over riding a legacy goodwill horse.

I can keep writing more and more with examples to prove my point. But don't want to start a serious war over here between Rybka and Fritz fans. Peace :-)