Author: Stefan Meyer-Kahlen
Date: 03:59:37 02/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 1999 at 05:25:34, Harald Faber wrote: >On February 20, 1999 at 05:50:56, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: > >>>>What's wrong with Shredder? > >>>OK, just my 2 cents what misses or does not satisfy: >>> >>>1) the prize :-) >>> Maybe I am known for critics in that direction but I can't see to justify >>>double prize as Fritz/Junior/Nimzo99 and Rebel. Probably they are even >>>stronger and offer many needful features. >>> I know that you are not the only one trying to keep the prize high but >>>considering the above named competitors it is hard to argue in favour of >>>Shredder. >>> For me the only superior property i Shredder is the GUI. It is the best >>> Windows-GUI (I know that MCS has come close). >> >>I agree that it is nicer for customers to buy a product for half price only, but >>I also think that the current price of Shredder is well justified. Maybe we >>should wait and see until and Fritz6 and Rebel for Windows is released to check >>weather they are still being sold at their current price. You can also get a > >Well, you may be right but I don't mind what WILL BE. At the moment there IS >s.th. that, my personal view, does not justify the prizes, neither for Shredder >nor for Genius6/MCS or Hiarcs7. I think Shredder3, Genius6 and Hiarcs7 are all worth their money. >>Shredder for half price. There is a "Mephisto Shredder" around with a weaker >>engine and less features. If you want "the real thing", well ... :-) > >Ya, I know that also Shredder1 is for DM28.80 available... > >>>2) no flexible time per move >>> I couldn't and can't believe it: there is only a fixed time per move, no >>> flexible. >> >>Just set it to x moves in y minutes. What's wrong with that? I always don't like >>to see people playing program X vs. program Y with a time limit of say 5 >>seconds/move. This is pure random as every program can and will take as much >>time as the programer wants. So you really can't compare that! > >?? FLEXIBLE means that as well your program as the opponent can take 3min, less >or more if necessary in a complicated position. And, senseful or not, EVERY >other program offers that time "control"... OK, it is no big deal adding this feature, but I just wanted to avoid the following situation: Shredder is playing program X, both set to 3 min/move. If both programs map this to 40/120 or something similiar, fine, but take a look at those two possibilities: (a) Program X1 allocates 3 min/move before every move, no matter how much time it has spent before. It doen't have any "easy move" feature (why saving time?) and usually takes well beyond 3 minutes (just to be "safe"). (b) Program X2 plays rather quick, it has a nice feature to play obvious moves more quickly (although it could be risky sometimes). It also allocates 3 min/move before every new move in this level. On average it is easliy possible that X2 is only using half the time X1 uses. Fair? I don't think so. I have seen many test reports where somebody plays X vs. Y with x sec/move. Am I the only one who thinks this is nonsense? If you want to play vs. Shredder with x sec/move on average, here's a hint. Set the level to y moves/x*y seconds, y should be 40 or 60. >>>3) strength >>> We can discuss if I will ever beat Shredder1-3 but one always wants the best >>> program to get the best analysis (e.g.) >>> Shredder has/had some highlights of course, but all in all I think it is a >>>bit behind. Maybe Sherdder can compete with other programs, I don't know, but >>> at the moment I am running a match against Hiarcs7 which doesn't look well >>>although Shredder has a speed advantage of 50%. So far: >>> Hiarcs7: 11.0, Shredder3: 7.0 >>> (Shredder on K6-200/24+8MB hash, Hiarcs7 on MMX166/47MB hash, 40/120+rest/60) >> >>OK, so you want a stronger engine and don't care so much about features, right? > >Right, I am a bit spoilt. :-) >Serious, as there are other competitors offering MANY (mostly senseful) features >personally I don't see any major addition of features I need in Shredder3 >comparing to Shredder2. Is there one single feature that is really smashing and >no other program has? >I mean I want to play the program, analyze games/databases and do some testing. >That is what even Shredder2 could do. Well, this is your personal view. Nevertheless here are some points added in Shredder3 which haven't been in Shredder2. (I didn't want to drift into advertising, but I don't see any other way to contradict the above.) * various learning features, * seperate board to follow Shredder's main line, * comments and variations can be added to every move, * cbf is supported, * nice feature to analyse 5 men endgames. Just click on one piece to see the perfect evaluation of the position with that particular piece on every other square (Shredder comes with 4 CDs containing all 5 men databases with <= 1 pawn) * much better database searching features, * better epd support, * no more size limit for nothing (PGN, user books etc.), * game analysis feature, * the engine is stronger! (you might not believe this :-) ), * much more I can't think of now. I think you can say a lot about Shredder3, but you can't say it doesn't have more useful features compared to Shredder2. I got the impression the there where many things missing in Shredder2. I fixed all of this in Shredder3. I really don't understand your above statement. >And finally, adding features is not the only way, they must be senseful and >needed, needed in the sense that customers wish them to be included. >BTW there is another feature you should definitely IMPROVE: the opening book >editor. I know :-( Be patient, there will be a nice opening book editor in Shredder4. >>>What really pleases is, as I mentioned above, the real true Windows GUI and the >>>autoplayer within Shredder. Exemplary! >>>BTW is it a bug that I can't load the next/previous game via the button/icon? It >>>worked well in Shredder2 but now I have to load the games again with CTRL-L >>>although I don't need to select a database, directly I get the game list. >> >>Sorry, I didn't get this. The buttons work fine on my computer. > >Hmm. Tried it again. Loaded a database (pgn) chose the 1st game and loaded. Then >tried F8 but didn't/doesn't work. ??? It works on my computers. What kind of database is it? Is the second game broken? >>>And, finally, I hope it didn't disturb you too much to lose against P.ConNers >>>while I said in the middlegame that black had the better position. Maybe I was >>>wrong. :-) Or Shredder patzte. ;-) >> >>Oh, you've been to Paderborn. Maybe everybody should wear name tags next time >>:-) >>Stefan > >I was "der große Blonde mit dem schwarzen Schuh". ;-) >(Hmm, I am not sure if I wore black shoes...) but as there were not so many >Kiebitzers maybe you remember. If not, maybe you recognize me again in June. ;-) No, I don't remember. If Shredder is losing I generally do not pay attention to comments from the spectators. It is hard enough to lose, I don't want to hear how stupid my program played :-) Stefan
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.