Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 09:19:40 05/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2001 at 06:53:29, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >I think in 1 year we have 30-50 UCI engines >because UCI is very interesting and free. How is UCI 'free'? Is there any free interface that supports it? >Have all programmers interest to make a Engine for Chess-Base ? If I can support ChessBase without much hassle I will, because people ask for it. Still it is not native in any way, just a hack to work with the brokenness of the Chessbase Winboard adapter. You cannot make a native engine for Chessbase, as they do not publish how to do it. Personally I do not care for ChessBase support, but some users do, and I try to help them. >Have programmers interest to make a Engine for the free WinBoard concept ? Sure. I do all I can to make my engine as useful as possible under Winboard (which includes sending Tim dozens of bugreports :) >Have programmers interest to see a little bit commercial contra ? Competition is good, a monopoly is not. Having one standard is good, having five is not. There's a difference there. >Have programmers interest to make a engine for a good GUI for users ? Yes. This is why I support WinBoard. It is the best GUI out there IMHO. >Have programmers interest to make in the next years only free versions, no >market or a market from one firm ? Yes. Sjeng will stay free, or at least a free version will always be available. >We must make 5 new engine concepts for make a little bit commercial contra ? >We must work all hand in hand ... Please god no. One protocol is enough. It's already bad enough that there is this ChessBase thing (calling it Winboard compatible would be insulting Tim) and this UCI thing. >And I mean we must work hand in hand with "Chess-Base ... the best ideas, the >best products, the best software" HA HA HA -- GCP
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.