Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:24:01 05/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2001 at 06:53:29, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >Hi there, > >the first engine concept is WinBoard with now I think over 130 compatible >engines (available, not available). > >After WinBoard we have the strong commercial Chess-Base concept with a lot of >top engines. > >And we have UCI by Stefan Meyer Kahlen, at the moment 8 programs are available, >more comming soon (Engine Edition, in this case ... third CD of Gambit-Soft ... >a better name as WinBoard Edition). I think in 1 year we have 30-50 UCI engines >because UCI is very interesting and free. > >I cannt see other ideas with engine concepts. >And I think 2 strong commercial concepts are enough. > >I think it is good if we have a little bit contra against Chess-Base. Good for >the market and the next years. Also if Chess-Base have a little bit contra we >have the possibilty to get more programs ... more engines ... and have more fun >with computer chess. > >This is my private opinion but I have also the idea that all programs compatible >to all GUIs. The best way for user. > >Now, what is right ? >A important questions for the future. > >Have all programmers interest to make a Engine for Chess-Base ? I didn't do this. ChessBase does this themselves, in the case of Crafty. >Have programmers interest to make a Engine for the free WinBoard concept ? Already done. >Have programmers interest to see a little bit commercial contra ? Doesn't matter to me at all. >Have programmers interest to make a engine for a good GUI for users ? I don't understand the question. Winboard/xboard _is_ a "good GUI" IMHO. >Have programmers interest to make in the next years only free versions, no >market or a market from one firm ? Yes... > >What have we all to do ? > >We must make 5 new engine concepts for make a little bit commercial contra ? >We must work all hand in hand ... > >And I mean we must work hand in hand with "Chess-Base ... the best ideas, the >best products, the best software" and must work hand in hand with a second idea. > >So I have interest to powerd UCI because the GUI from Stefan is very good. > >Best >Frank I'm not interested in UCI for one main reason. We already have the winboard engine protocol. I don't see the need for _another_ protocol, as it makes programming more complex and error-prone.
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.