Virtual PC

[azmike]

I have been Windows user for some time but some of the new Apple computers are talking to me. Most all programs I use have a Macintosh twin except for Handicapping programs.

I understand there is a program called "Virtual PC" which permits Apple computers to run PC programs. I have heard it is rather slow however.

Does anyone have any experience with this program and specifically whether handicapping programs work on machines running this software.

Thanks.

[azmike]

I did some checking at www.cnet.com and the user groups at www.deja.com and the near consensus among users is that Windows program perform fine/ok with this program.

Some complain of slower than expected performance but most complaints center around"high performance" programs.

It would seem that since most handicapping programs are more "number crunching" than graphic intensive they should perform adequately. However, if anyone out there has actually used this program in connection with handicapping programs I would like to hear from you.

[kgonzales]

About 5 years ago I used an emulator program called softwindows to run Allways on a Mac. It worked very well, but was a little slow. That program was discontinued and replaced by VPC, which I'm sure is vastly improved although I have never used it. I subsequently have developed my own software/database in Filemaker Pro which implements the Handicapping Magic methodology/numbers using BRIS datafiles. I also received an e-mail from Eric Lanjahr at ITSdata saying they are considering developing mac versions of their current programs(Handicapper's Daily, Master Magician). I wouldn't hold my breath though.

If you are considering running OSX with Virtual PC, I have read reports that version 5 is much slower in OSX than OS9.
You might want to check out this website devoted to Mac-Windows compatibility: www.macwindows.com

KG

[andicap]

What does Virtual Windows cost??

[Dave Schwartz]

A lot. And we pay and pay and pay.

[baravot]

Not too different from HSH(and we pay and pay and pay), is it?

[Dave Schwartz]

Baravot,

Some do, some don't. Free upgrades are nice, aren't they? Don't see many of those in Bill Land.


Dave Schwartz

[Lefty]

Baravot, comparing an operating system with a handicapping prgm comes under the heading of non-analgous.

[baravot]

Lefty,

I agree. I was not comparing an operating system with a handicapping program. I was responding directly to Schwartz' comment- a highly ironic comment, it seems to me, given my experience as an HSH customer.

[Dick Schmidt]

I find it exceptional that handicappers seem to think they are entitled to cheap programs and free updates for life. As anyone who has ever done it will tell you, it is close to impossible to write software and play professionally at the same time. Especially if you have a family, or a life. What's a programmer to do? If he can't charge for his work, why do it?

As in most professions, in handicapping it is easy to tell the winners from the losers. The losers complain that the program is too expensive, the upgrades are too frequent and too much money, even the data is too expensive. "I only use .50 files" is one of the dumber statements I've read. A loser telling the world that he'd rather have inferior data than pay someone a living wage. The winners are looking for ways to send their programmers MORE money because they realize what a knife-edge profession handicapping program writing is and they want to insure the product is there in the future.

Dick

[baravot]

Dick Schmidt wrote:

"The winners are looking for ways to send their programmers MORE money because they realize what a knife-edge profession handicapping program writing is and they want to insure the product is there in the future."


Have you considered tithing a percentage of your winnings to your favorite needy programmer?

[Dick Schmidt]

Baravot,

Yes.

Dick

[Lefty]

Dick, What's so damn magic about HDW files other than their the most expensive on the mkt and the price is different depending on what prg you're using. I guess guys like Barovot and me just don't see the magic, I have a lot of prgms and truthfully I do just as well and better with some of ones that use .50 files than I ever have with HSH. No sour grapes just a fact. I have no problem paying for updates and have every one Dave put out. But when I, after much analysis, bght HSH I was very disappointed when all of a sudden my $75 files were costing me $129. This was because of the sudden switch to HDW.
Believe me, if the HDW files were so "magic" Dave wouldn't have lost the customers he has because of them. He hasn't lost me completely yet, i'm in one mo. out the next and am really amazed my little .50 files and get me just as many wins as HDW. Of course it's the prgm and the user of prgm not the files. Isn't the source of all these files the same?
And some of my prgms that use .50 files cost almost as much as HSH.
There are winners out there using .50 files, believe it or not.. just as there are good drivers driving Hondas and bad drivers driving BMW's.
It's not the files, it's the user, and a lot of us would just as soon save a little money.
I don't think that's whining I think it's good economics.

[baravot]

Lefty,

I agree. As some are fond of saying, "this ain't rocket science," and because of the nature of racing, adequate data (such as is contained in those $.50 files) coupled with some handicapping savvy and experience works just as well in most cases. Such is my experience.

[hdcper]

To all concerned,

I thought hard before deciding to post, but really don’t feel happy with some of the comments made by Dick. It appears those of us who criticize a product we have been associated with are LOSERS. But yet, he makes claims of 54% winners playing two horses a race with a +30% ROI and slams anyone that asks for proof. We all are legends in our own minds at times but don’t expect everyone else to believe everything you say.

With regard to HSH, I first would like to say that Dave went out of his way at times when I was using the program to help me with my questions over the phone. He also provided an upgrade to HSH pro from the basic program for free because of a customer I referred him that purchased the program. Also like Dave mentioned all upgrades were free, but lack of documentation required myself as a user to contact other users that had beta tested the upgrades for help or if I wanted the need to purchase videos of how to use the new features. Seminars were offered but because of the cost of the seminar, expense of the room and traveling expenses; I personally found it to be non-cost effective (again in my own opinion).

Dick mentioned that as any programmer, income must be derived from his or her product. Realize that income is derived from the purchase of the software, upgrading to HSH pro, purchasing videos, attending seminars and especially the monthly download costs from HDW. As I am sure Dave would agree, his share of the download cost represents a nice income if his user group is large enough.

Personally, I was struggling somewhat with HSH when I left. But as I am sure Dave would agree, I had asked for several months before leaving that an upgrade to the database feature to test more than two factors at a time was needed in my opinion. Since this upgrade never occurred, I decided to move on to other software that offered this type of feature.

Just my view,

Hdcper

[Aussieplayer]

G'day guys,

Hope you don't mind me butting in with an opinion on costs?

Aren't we an opinionated lot? :D

Anyway........current (up to the minute) story: I am helping someone set up a racing operation. Whilst there are quite a few sources of "future" race data, there are only 3 major suppliers of complete db's containing several years of past data.

I will only recommend one. This is because I know this one has brilliant customer service - and spends more than the others to obtain their raw data, so that they have a more COMPLETE db (ie. more fields available). This might add another 20 bucks or so per month compared to the others, I don't know.

The data is CLEAN. They make sure things like trainer names etc. are "fixed" (you know how their can be a couple of versions of a name etc.) - and a whole heap of other bugs that crop up in data. This is a big job.

Can I afford this service? No, not yet. That's okay - I'm using a cheaper service and winning at the moment, so when I build up a bit, I will look at it.

But mark my words (you decide if this applies to HDW): there is a LOT to be said for CLEAN data, COMPLETE data, and CUSTOMER SERVICE. Not only is there a lot to say for it, it is worth something - ie. money!!!

I had to miss a day of racing recently (which is pretty bad as I'm only betting on one day, therefore, I missed a week's action) simply because of obvious malfunction of past ratings on the part of my data provider. I accept that because of how little I pay. But that wouldn't have happened with the quality provider.

It's not a sin not to be able to afford something, but don't knock it just because you can't.

Lastly, Lefty, hdcper etc. I'm not really sure if your issue is with HSH and updates etc. or with HDW and their prices.

Re: paying for updates - well, wouldn't you expect to?

Just my thoughts with no offense to anyone intended.

Cheers
AP

[Lefty]

Aussie, I have had no qualms about paying for updates; in fact, an update that add substantually to a prgm I expect to pay for. I was just answering Dick who made an absolute statement: that people who use .50 files are losers and it's no more so than to say everyone who uses HDW files are winners; ain't necessarily so. I still say all the files come from the same place and yes, HDW might give better trainer info and those Cramer nos. but since I use neither well, those .50 files are good enough for me.

[PaceAdvantage]

Isn't it amazing how quickly a thread can veer off topic??? And to think, this thread was originally about emulating Windows-based software on a Mac..... :eek:

And did Dick really say that people who use .50 files are losers?? I don't think so.....


==PA

[Lefty]

PA, okay, he said "I only use .50 files, one of the dumber statements i've heard. Pretty much like that.
I still disagree. See nothing dumb about using only .50 files, in fact, frugal. There's nothing magic about HDW just because they're a hundred or more(depends where you get 'em)
My wife's Honda gets her across town just like someone else's BMW.
Those .50 files get me as many winners as HDW. So what's dumb. using the more expensive ones or the less expensive ones, which, to for my use, just as good?

[azmike]

Back on topic:

The lowest price I found for "Virtual PC" by searching www.cnet was about $175 for the latest version.

[Aussieplayer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you were playing enough tracks wouldn't those .50 files end up costing nearly what HDW does anyway?

Cheers
AP

[Lefty]

Aussie, not true anymore. One can get all tracks for $59.95
There ya go.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think Dick was emphasizing this part of the statement "I ONLY"...

...meaning he was saying that those who DON'T believe that more expensive files are worthwhile are incorrect.....

I will attest that for my purposes, the more expensive BRIS DRF files ARE more valuable to me, because they contain MORE data (for instance, the DRF track variant, among other things....)


==PA

[azmike]

Now that we are off topic anyway but all involved in a pretty interesting topic--can someone summarize the pros and cons of each data provider?

I have been using HDW and have had very few corrupted files with very heavy usage. I am not that familiar with the others.

Do the programs listed at HDW's web site work with other data sources?

In the old days I used to download one set of data for one fee and use it in 2-3 different programs--can you still do that today?

Also, if you used HSH and also Synergism, All in One or Capper would you need to pay a separate monthly fee for each? That is what I believe to be the case.

Thanks

[Lefty]

PA, I read him right. Don't believe you did. Hey if you're not using HDW then you must be one of the guys Dick refers to, maybe not; those files are a buck or more.
He did not say for me. The man is incorrect no matter how you slice it: He said HDW files are superior for all and intimated that those who use .50 files are whiners and losers. I don't whine but I will yell to the rooftops that all who use .50 files are not losers and all who use HDW are not winners.
I guess that about covers it.

[Aussieplayer]

Ah okay, just checking, lol

HDW sure has a good reputation hey? They must be doing something right!

Here, you can get all races every day for $25 per month (maybe $15 your money). This however only gives you 5 start form which you can of course import into whatever/whoever's proggie you are using. I know people who do just that and do fine.

(By the way, I incorrectly said I only play 1 day a week - that wasn't quite true - I only play that particular method with those ratings one day a week. I play other methods Sun-Fri. because that particular form only covers Saturday racing. Sorry, just wanted to be 100% honest).

But the top notch provider I mention charges more than 10 times the above!! Worth it?? Apparently so!!

You are right, I would imagine people win and lose with either. The form I use on Saturdays is giving me good success and is only around $3 your money for the 4 Saturday tracks!!

I doubt Dick would really mean that people who pay for cheaper data are automatically losers. Or vice verca.
But I know I am working towards being able to use the top notch stuff!

Cheers
AP

[Lefty]

AZMike, if you use HSH, Synergism, Capper, HTR etc you are in for one big data bill as you have to pay for each prgm's data as the programmers get a cut from HDW. Hey, that's okay. Just don't say you use HDW data in your prgm cause it's so superior to everything else. Say, "hey, I need the money" That's okay, this is America. I do object to my data being switched on me after i've become involved and was planning on one price and then it's another; but hey, I even got past that and went on with the program and each update thinking the next would make me a winner. Never happened. I have found a couple programs I can win with and they use TSN .50 files. That's a fact.

[Lefty]

AzMike, I forgot: Yes, you pay .50 for TSN file and can use it in a number of diff prgms and only pay once.

[azmike]

Which programs can use the same 50 cent files. Just curious because the data is a cost of doing business and each of us needs to watch our over head.

[Lefty]

azmike, (i'll get your handle right, yet) There are a lot of prms that take the same .50 files and i'll prob miss some but: Equisim,
Zambuto's Prgm, Procapper, Fast Fred Pro, Contenders 10, Horsesense, Pro Pace, Focus 2000, all I can think of now but rest assured, there's more.

[azmike]

Thanks. I used Contenders several years ago, I think it was version 7 or 8 back then. I used it as my 2nd program just to see if there were other horses I might want to consider in my exotics. It did ok. Are you having any success with the latest version, if you are using it.

I haven't tried the others but a buddy of mine has done real well this summer with the procapper.

[Aussieplayer]

Lefty, it's an oldie but a truism that people win & lose regardless of the proggie or data etc. If you win with a different program, that's cool because you've finally found something that works for you.

I spoke to someone in the last couple of days who has not been able to become a winning player despite switching to a "top level" proggie and even paying extra for some personal programming.

But (and this was interesting), he doesn't think any less of the proggie, in fact he praises it for what he has learned from it. He realised he has become very close to breakeven, and will prob. stick with the proggie for a while longer.

Was it Kitts who said it? It sure ain't the program that makes you win or lose!! Couldn't be a truer word spoken in the Handicapping Software Forum!

Cheers
AP

[Aussieplayer]

Speed Handicapper is another using .50 files (that is, if I am correct that one of ITS or TSN are the provider of said files).

www.desertsea.com

[Dick Schmidt]

Goodness, these topics do zig and zag, don't they.

To all who win with any data source (or no data source): more power to you. Keep it up. My point is that selecting a handicapping program based on what files it uses is, let's say, less than optimum. I have found that the basic numbers from HDW are just better than anything else on offer. When HSH switched from ITS to HDW, I saw an immediate 5 or 6% increase in my bottom line. And I don't use trainers or the Cramer speed figs either.

Who cares how much data costs? What is at issue is how much you win using that data. The sheets are over $700 per track, for one month, but Len seems to find customers. Why? Because they see the value of good information. I'm not betting huge amounts yet, but I play a lot of races and figure that the HDW data pays for itself in about one or two days.

I probably shouldn't have brought up the whole data cost thing, but I was reacting to the idea that programs (and data) are all overpriced ripoffs that are making their creators rich. If this is just a hobby, then fine, use cheap data and be happy. However, it seems to me that many (most?) folks on this board want to take their racing to a professional or semi-professional level. A professional is judged by his tools. What with computers, data, broadband internet connection and programs, I spend about $10,000 a year on handicapping "stuff." Sure, I could "save" more than half of than if I tried, but why would I want to go into my business using tools that I have proved to myself are inferior?

I'm not saying that you can't win with any other data source, nor am I saying that data or programs have to be expensive to work. I don't use the most expensive data or program. I have found a tool kit that works for me, and while assembling that kit, I didn't make cost an overriding concern. I was looking to make money, not save money.

Dick

[aaron]

Dick.You are right about the cost of data being inmaterial if you are able to make money using the data.The problem is not the cost of data,but finding the data that suits each person best.I have tried various types of data and am still not sure which I prefer to use on a steady basis.I guess this is an individual problem,but trying too many products can be less than productive.I think many products out there are excellent.The problem is finding a fit and then staying with the product.

[GR1@HTR]

I looked in to Virtual PC type software a while ago since I use an IMAC at work...Not sure how good or bad Virtual PC is but you can do a search on cnet.com or zdnet.com for emulation software to get reviews.


A few words of advice. Make sure you have a butt load of RAM since the emulation software will require you to essentialy run 2 computers at the same time. I recently upgraded from OS 8.6 to MAC OS X and upgraded to 160 Megs of RAM and this thing still runs like a Pinto Bean...A better alternative might be to purchase a cheap laptop for about $200 and be able to do what you want, where you want, which is what I do now.

[Lefty]

azmike, I used Contenders for a few months as a check on another prgm then had lottsa computer probs and did a complete restore. I lost that OTHER prgm and haven't been able to even find its website again. I think it may be gone. It was sent to me by originator by e-mail and I never got it backed up. Then Focus and EquiSim came along and i have never put contenders back, prob will someday.
So may programs, so little time.

[azmike]

I am familiar with Equisim, although I haven't used it, but what is "Focus".

[Lefty]

Azmike, Focus 2000 put out by Adp systems. It uses fps nos. and has a lot of proprietary nos such as USD nos, etc. It will also keep a database and f10 button, once you have enough files of a racetype, will point out a dutchbet of 2 horses as well as an exacta bet. I have a few friends who like the Mdn analyssis button. They say it makes a profit whenever top mdn has a 100 pts. John Cole uts out a demo of this prgm and yes, it will use Tsn .50 files. I don't have the link handy but think it's just ADP Systems.com

[azmike]

I did a search at www.google.com and found the site at http://www.adpa.com/focus.htm

Sounds interesting enough to look at the free download. Thanks.

[Lefty]

Aussie, you are right; Speed Handicapper will use ITS 1.50 files, Trackmaster 1.00 files and TSN .50 files but you have to buy a separate module for each.

[azmike]

For anyone interested in this product-here is a recent review I found:

http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2871273,00.html

Sounds like it would probably work okay.

[JimG]

Continuing the discussion on programs that use .50 TSN files. According to their website, Fast Fred Pro does.

The website is located at www.kangagold.com

[Lefty]

Jim, I have Fast Fred Pro and it does use .50 TSN files.

[JimG]

What do you think of Fred? A dog with fleas? or does it have some merit? Reply here or e-mail as you like. Thanks Lefty.


Jim

[Lefty]

Afraid you were going to ask. Haven't spent much time with it but way it's setup last 4 pacelines. something like that, I used it for strictly a spoy play when a horse controlled first 2 fractions. There's a lpt more to prgm but this is what I zoned in on. It's inexpensive and maybe there's more to it than i've explored(well, that's a given) I've no doubt greatly underused its potential. Seems I buy these prgms and then don't use them much. (with a few exceptions) it's a sickness, yes it is...