Author: Moritz Berger
Date: 15:26:06 05/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 1998 at 15:38:03, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On May 05, 1998 at 04:36:16, Moritz Berger wrote: >>*ALL* (read: all) Windows programs use their own (read: proprietary) >>auto232 compatible "mechanisms". > >Exactly. And the programs can be bought running autoplayer-compatible in >ANY shop. I can buy Mchess7 and connect it with CSTal on my autoplayer >and study it, the autoplayer , or whatever. >This is not possible with fritz. Right ? >The autoplayer is not public. And Fritz 5 (thanks god) is no DOS program, unlike M-Chess oder CSTal, right? > >>Every program has its own implementation of the autoplayer driver, the >>only requirement is compatibility with the existing (read: DOS) version. > >CSTal got its driver from austria. Chrilly Donninger send it to chris. >Chris had to send one unit of CSTal to austria that they were able to >make it working. They later published anything about this interface. >They help and support people to do so. >This was not possible for ChessBase ? WHY ? Because Fritz 5 is no DOS program. Releasing a DOS version for the SSDF would have upset me (!) and made me join the anti-ChessBase gang on this argument. Do you remember Genius4/DOS/SSDF? On a 8 MB machine, Genius got 7 MB hash tables, Fritz 4 on the same machine (running as a Win 3.1 application) got 512 KB hash tables. I think you get the point ... Fritz 5 under DOS might be 20% faster than under Windows. My argument has always been: The F5/SSDF engine plays *exactly* like the out of the box commercial Fritz 5 product (both are Windows programs, both have identical books, identical chess engines), it only has one additional coponent: An auto232 compatible device driver. > >>For the paranoid among us: The fact that Chrilly Donninger and Stefan >>Meyer-Kahlen have publicized the source codes (not executables, binary >>files, but C programs(!)) of 2 different (!) auto232 drivers for Windows >>(read: 32 bit Windows, not 16 bit Windows, hence not usable without >>modifications by Fritz) doesn't ensure at all that Shredder and Nimzo >>(both Windows programs) do in fact use exactly those drivers - if you >>consider e.g. the bugfixes in the latest Nimzo patch you might conclude >>that the probability is indeed quite high that they did not just copy >>and paste the public sourcecode into their programs but made some >>modifications. > >Since nobody complains about the MODIFICATIONS and since the programs >WITH THE MODIFICATIONS ARE to buy in ANY SHOP since they are published, >I DON'T UNDERSTAND your point. OK, why don't you complain about the MODIFICATIONS? Can you prove that Stefan or Chrilly didn't implement any "feature" they liked in their autoplayers? > >>Thorsten's statement >>>No - when Fritz5 implemented the auto232 device, THAN anything is ok. >>therefore is utterly impossible to fulfill, ever, by any Windows >>programmer, since there is no such thing as "the auto232 device". > >The auto232 player needs special output of the text-string and special >commands supported. The win32 code by Stefan that is open for any chess >programmer gives example how to do it for win programs. Stefan Meyer-Kahlen has published some source code that essentially gets you as far as: If you're going to implement *your own* auto232 driver, this is an idea how it might look like. He has done a great job on this and I really appreciate his efforts. >You know exactly what I am talking about , instead you want counting >words and defintions. If you would have bought an auto232-autoplayer-set >at Gambit-Soft or Dieter Steinwenders Computer-Schach and Spiele Shop, >you would know what I am talking about. It is a commercial PRODUCT ! >You don't know it ? ;-) It is a commercial *** DOS *** product. > >>The "slap in the face" statement from Thorsten therefore is really a >>slap in the face - in the face of truth. > >Again - the autoplayer232 is a product !! >You want to tell me now that this thing is NOT REAL and only an idea to >torture you and chessBase ? No Windows autoplayer for poor Thorsten. >I would advise you consider about your own statements Moritz. They don't >make sense to me. Hope I could clarify some aspects. > >>The sad thing about this is that I informed Thorsten about exactly these >>technical aspects in a recent telephone call. > >The sad thing is that you don't understand : >if they want to implement it, they have to make it ok, so that nobody >else thinks there is a manipulation. They have to sell the program WITH >this interface, so that any customer proves that the interface is ok. This is your only point (why don't you skip the rest about "cheating" and the like?): You want them to release the auto232 driver to the general public. I would also like them to do this. Maybe they ought to sell it to Weiner for DM 3000 and have him bother with customer support of that product ... >This is the way it is done with all programs I know, Genius5, Mchess7, >Hiarcs6, Rebel9, Diogenes, Wchess, ... Genius 5 has only a DOS version which supports the auto232 interface. This version is somewhat faster than the Windows version and gets more hash tables on machines with <= 32 MB memory. I would prefer to see the SSDF test the actual Windows version. >Don't you understand this ??? > > >>"Why the hell" does Thorsten chose to cheat here by repeating his >>ignorant ramblings? He ought to know better by now, and I'm sure he >>does. But there seem to be truly special rules for ChessBase if it comes >>to him ... His behaviour reminds me of the church's official attitude >>towards the discoveries of Gallilei, a position which they upheld for an >>amazing 400 years. Let's see how long it takes for Thorsten to admit >>certain facts ... ;-) > >I am atheist. I am not catholic. Bad example Moritz. >You should not try this. I knew you would like it ;-))) >The fact remains: the did not implement the usual auto232 interface. >If so - why have so many programmers complains ? Like yourself explained: Only because Fritz became the #1 on the SSDF list. Don't tell me you would have ever bothered to asked how the SSDF tested it when it had finished up 43rd ... > Because they are all >suddenly are all catholic and want to torture ChessBase=Galileo Galilei? >Good example you choose. ChessBase is the victim. We are the ugly >catholic church, hunting bitches. Brilliant. witches, Thorsten, witches, not bitches ... :-))) >I don't think that ChessBase is the victim. They KNEW from the beginning >that this would cause trouble. Experts like Moritz Berger could have >advised them that this will never work. Since you even don't understand >NOW, I see that the advise you gave them was wrong. They didn't ask me on this issue. I would have told them to release the autoplayer. Hang on Thorsten, maybe one of these days they're gonna surprise you ... >All your words cannot change this. Dito. > >>This is beyond any kind of controversial discussion, this is *facts* vs. >>*fiction*. > >Explain this to Richard Lang / Chrilly Donninger / Stefan Meyer Kahlen / >Marty Hirsch / Ed Schroeder ... Marty Hirsch? Don't drag him down in this mess! Chrilly Donninger? Read the lousy CSS article again and look for an inset with his opinion. Ed Schroeder? Ed has acted very reasonable and tried to clarify the question if the F5 autoplayer "cheats". You easily dismiss his results, but I think that's really great sportsmanship from him and he has my very deep respect for spending his time on trying to get some objective facts on the issue instead of merely blowing up smoke. >Suddenly the whole world seems to be Ficticious. And the only realists >live in ChessBase world... The new ChessBase ad slogan? May I suggest it to them? "The only realists live in ChessBase world". Sounds great ;-))) Or maybe Ed can have it? "The only realists live in Rebel world" - I hope Anand does, too ... ;-)
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.