I think there may be some bugs regarding the computer analysis. I recently submitted a game for analysis by the computer at the 2000 rating strength. Granted, 2000 is very weak for an analysis engine, but some of the suggested moves are so weak it has to be a bug. In particular, the computer repeatedly missed a mate-in-one. Flip through the diagram moves below to see what I mean.

lol the computer must be tweaking out or something, although it is still mate in 1

Yeah, I analyzed a game recently and it gave me a line that ended with me in checkmate, but it said that I had a decisive advantage.

I played the computer on weak when it wasn't meant to mess around it actually missed some mating oportunities and instead of mate in one it decided to bring the knight in to mate which took additional moves to checkmate me. There was another game where I beat the computer and instead of sacrificing its bishop for my passed pawn/s it simply moved back and forth without aim until I queened both and mated with the queening of one of them.

Computers can't apply everything that reasonable players can and naturally do. I use the computer analysis light heartedly but seriously consider the alternative options and the mistakes and blunders it points out. There is something of value in it but don't take it too seriously - we are humans not machines.

You can actually play against the analysis computer? Note that I'm not talking about the Little Chess Partner (http://www.chess.com/play/computer.html), which is extremely weak. If you set that to "Easy" then it'll miss nearly everything. But the analysis computer is different -- it's supposed to be rated around 2000 for free members. For a 2000-rated computer to repeatedly miss a mate-in-one -- that has got to be a bug, not simply because the computer miscalculated.

Same thing has happened here. A lot. 

limiting the analysis to 8 ply will result in some serious flaws. It can be used to point out obvious errors, but if you want better results there are many open source engines out there

You guys got it all wrong...chess.com outsources the analysis to humans.....they get minimum wage and must do 5 game analysis in an hour... i can't go into more detail..i'm taking a chance just revealing this....

I presume when you got that position you played Qh7# in your game. What did the computer say when it analysed that move. "This checkmate is a blunder!"

That position was obtained from a variation given by the computer. It wasn't actually reached in the game.