Why in this day and age there is only one company, that being PokerStars and Full Tilt the only company with a high quality client and company?

And when will there be a company that can match the bar they have set? Is it not worth it with US being out of the market and Rational Group holding so much of the market share for a new company to even try?

Well it was two entirely separate software houses that produces PS and FTP, so really they should be counted as 2. Personally I also like 888's; doesn't have the features of PS/FTP but its fast, stable, and has a good "feel" to it. There's some interesting things going on with some of the regional guys too, like Barriere and Winamax.

I always used to have a soft spot for Bodog's too, at least from a stylistic point of view. Haven't used it in a couple of years though.

With that said, i think your overall point stands. Honestly i don't think *any* operator has a really quality client or has really innovated. The poker lobby still looks like excel. The industry has been around over a decade now, have made billions in revenue, and still we see crazy-long software cycles (updates taking more than a major operating system release!), bugs galore when they do come out, and perennial issues that are never resolved.

Interesting, do you have to be in France to play on Winamax?

That is a good question.

I have asked the same questions myself. Its hard to believe that no one can match the software.

We'll see what the future holds. There are companies that have managed to stay on top for long times in their industry. I think stars is such a brand.

I do think that the US market is going to stir things up in the long run as local casinos will be huge advantage.

No Iam a uk player and play on winimax a lot, very nice software.

I always assumed it was because of bad coding and it would be to hard to add/change features, because they just dont give a **** or the sites are not making enough to dump money into such things.

its not even the software that draws me in the beginning. Its the openness they are about communicating with poker players to better approve the software and solve any issues that might come up. Pokerstars is pretty active in the forums. I don't see any other poker site that is as active on the forums as Stars. Start up a thread in the internet poker section involving a problem with Stars and you'll get a response quickly from a Stars representative.

There are at least three skins/networks that have entire dedicated subforums here on 2p2 frequented and moderated by representatives from those skins/networks...

Only two AFAIK, but there are also a number of others that have support threads, including the aforementioned Winamax.

This. Considering the money PokerStars has made, I'd expect more innovation than say Microsoft...and in reality, Microsoft is fast moving compared to these sites.

How has nobody made the comment that they are the only rational company?

Gotta add that not only the Windows client of Winamax is pretty good but there mobile client as well.

i dont think its necessarily about the client but the overall experience and the ability to create a solid reputation and importantly a presence in global market. and only PS has been able to do that

I am suprised that no one mentioned microgaming software. While the company itself is kinda shaddy the software itself can be easily comapred with Start/FTP and is really nice to play.
Kinda shame that Landbrokes and Unibet are moving to Ipoker next year cause the network might not survive such a hit.

BTW one of the reason of huge success of 888 has been their superior sodftware (the one software that is really recreational players firendly, while regs might not like some features the recreational players do enjoy them).

Lets be honest both Ipoker and bwin.party should be at least 3 times bigger in poker given their casino/betting player base and one of the biggest reason they aren't is the software.

I think one issue is about the cost of bugs. My firefox has bugs all the time and I don't use experimental releases. I'm sure you can find many other examples of popular, high quality software.

When firefox bugs, it doesn't cost Mozilla a ton of money, but the wrong type of bugs can really hurt a poker room.

Combine that with rewards for better software: While it is clear that poker software does matter to players, I think casino software matters more to players (playing slots or bingo for example) than in poker. And since most of the largest sites outside of PS/FTP have casinos and/or sports and/or bingo type offerings, I would imagine a lot of work goes into that software too.

There is probably also a lot of backend stuff that happens that we don't see or notice. Syncing payment processing, security and all sorts of other stuff together.

I'm not trying to make excuses, I think the industry as a whole has lagged behind FTP and PS for years, and the excuse of "well they stuck with the USA market, that's why they could afford to do this stuff" is getting older and older at this point.

I really wish Google got heavily into poker, or Amazon, but that seems to be a hail mary chance at this point.

There is evidence that it takes years of development for internet poker software to reach the level that PokerStars and FTP have achieved.

If you were able to play on the very first release of PokerStars software, you might see potential, but it would not have many of the features and enhancements that we now appreciate.

And during such a long period of development, there were pitfalls that led to the demise of many competitors.

It is natural selection.

And PokerStars is at the top of the food chain.

888's client is far from being stable or fast.

I used to play pretty much all the major sites. I used to sit and play across 10 networks and be waiting at ~50 tables at the same time. On 888 I've clocked about 300,000 hands. Never had a crash or freeze, always felt it responsive and snappy, as I say, one of the best online poker experiences i've had. Far from "advanced," but it's recreational-play friendly and more than enough for me.

So I guess it just depends. I never massmultitabled 888 solo, so maybe that mattered.