Author: James T. Walker
Date: 05:07:29 11/11/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 1998 at 07:26:47, Thoralf Karlsson wrote: >On November 09, 1998 at 23:56:24, Detlef Pordzik wrote: > >> >>If someone can answer why the most bought chess program versions in the world >>>are not tested then I would like to know why please. >> >>While printing the new SSDF list I recognized something similar and asked Mr. >>Karlsson in a email concerning this today. >> >>I doubt, I'll get an answer. > > >Since you mention your email to me and express your doubts concerning my >possible answer, I'll include it here with my comments: > > > >>Dear sirs, >>dear Mr. Karlsson, >>> > >Dear Mr. Pordzik, > > >>I wonder - and yet would like to ask, if you will decide to let the >>world's best selling chess product ever - >> >>Chessmaster - in it's version 6.000 participate in your list, this time; > > >Testing or not testing CM6000 is not a question of a mere decision, it’s a >question of practical possibilities. > >Nowadays practically all our games with PC-programs are played automatically >using auto232. Unfortunately the Chessmaster-programs lacks this possibility. ( >Why, you could ask.) So the only option is to play time consuming manual games. >We have done that before, and it would be no problem, if we only had members >with the right hardware and the wish and possibility to do it. > >But, practically speaking, that is not the case. > >Our wish is to play with all stronger programs, including CM6000 and Virtual >Chess, but as it is now we lack that possibility. > >Let me tell you about how our testing situation looks like at the moment: > >We have eight testers, including myself, with the possibility to play ten >automatic meetings at the same time. In some cases 24 hours a day, in other >cases one game each night. Not so seldom the automatic play doesn’t work, >leaving some machines inactive. Very few, if any, of these testers are >interested in going back to the old way of manual testing. > >One tester plays most of the games (manually of course) between chess computers >(Atlanta at the moment). He has no experience with PCs and doesn’t own one. >Another tester plays games between chess computers and a P90 now and then. He >cannot afford to upgrade to P200 MMX. A third tester sometimes plays games >between chess computers, and did earlier play them against a P90. But now he has >switched to a K6-machine. > >Actually we only have one active manual tester of PC-programs left. He plays >something like 40 - 60 games a year, but he wants to try several of the new >programs, not just spending time with a single one. He owns a P200 MMX and plays >his games against SPARC. > >What happened to those ten persons who played with CM5000 P90 and those three >who played with Shredder 1.0 P90? Well, they have simply stopped testing! >(Except for the one mentioned above) Either because they are not interested any >longer or because they don’t own the right hardware. And SSDF doesn’t have money >to buy them one or two P200 MMX. > > >>since SSDF showed no interest to take advantage on CM 5.000 on 200 MMX >>or CM 5.500 - at all. > >It’s not a question of showing interest or not. See above. > >> >>Both decisions concerning J.d. Konings products seem really astonishing >>for an outsider. >> > >In that case you must have had un unrealistic view of SSDFs resources. > > >>I'd like to inform ours readers about this, since I just released a >>larger article about Johan de Koning and his products. >> > >Yes, I have seen it. You criticize us for not having played older programs also >on newer hardware. Don’t you understand that there are capacity limits for us, >especially when we cannot play automatically? > > >>Maybe it's even possible this time to show this engine the respect >>and let it play on your best - a 200 MMX ? >> > >It’s not a question of showing respect or not , that we haven’t played CM5000, >CM5500 or CM6000 on P200 MMX. > >Be thankful for what we have done, don’t criticize us for not having done more. > > >>I'd really appreciate an answer. >> > >On CCC you have said twice that you didn’t expect me to answer. Why? > >Anyway, now you have received an answer. I hope it will help you to understand >what SSDF can and cannot do. > >If our best manual testers decided to start playing again and managed to get >hold of P200 MMX-machines, SSDF would gladly try to organize the testing of >CM6000. > >Best regards > >Thoralf Karlsson WELL SAID !! I don't understand why some people criticize other peoples work when they have done none at all ! I have played several thousand games between computers/programs manually and enjoyed it. However I am not volunteering to do this as a "Job" which is expected of me. I also would not like to tie up my two computers 24 hours a day doing this when I enjoy doing other things with them. I am greatful for the work SSDF has done in the past. Jim Walker
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.