Author: Mridul Muralidharan
Date: 05:36:37 09/08/05
Go up one level in this thread
Ok , now that you have brought about the fact that , it is not the 'right' that is under question - but (supposedly) the economics which should be considered. We have a different facet to the discussion. So essentially , you are saying that since chessbase is here , it has an installed base and so should be considered. BUT - you miss a few crucial point :) 1) Zappa is sold not just as an engine - but the entire expierence : which includes the GUI. So obviously , it is imperative that people use it in its own GUI. 2) Theoretically , supporting chessbase (via UCI) itself has no problems - IF they play fair. We have seen their indecent tactics way too many time : the accidental 'bugs' , the new "features" which tend to cripple all the non-native engines. I have seen gradute students fix bugs at a faster rate and write less error prone code than what is in chessbase (note - it is not a new product : they have had enough time to mature !) 3) If what you say about market dynamics is so true - chessmaster should not sell much : but it sells like hotcakes ! (from what I have heard) The target audience is not really a computer chess expert unlike most people here. The target audience needs a complete chess expierence - not a cli engine. (If someone implements the idea Fernando mentioned about : he could be the next millionair) The target audience wants to play chess , analyze games , look at databases , prepare openings , etc - not always try to beat the engine which comes bundled. He does need a sparring partner ofcourse ! Does whole of CCC belongs to this target audience ? Maybe not ! If that were the case , what would be the problem with humouring CCC and adding UCI support ? The reasons for that have been given :) Ok , I got to rush now ... not sure if I will be able to explain more or continue this discussion : thanks for your comments Rolf - appreciate them. - Mridul PS : These are my personal comments and has nothing to do with zappa/diep3d/etc. On September 08, 2005 at 07:54:32, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >Nice defense from your side! > >No, I dont agree with all the other points but I asked what a message could be >worth if already the first statement is wrong. > >Let me take two new statements from your second defense. > >(1) Why complying to a company just because it came first? > >That is a typical mathematical error, overseeing the reality outside of maths. >If you ask me morally then yes at every instant of history, so also right now, >every newcomer has the same rights and chances than the runners from the past. >This exactly gives the three persons defending Zappa business plans all the >rights to do what they want right now. No doubt about it. > >But where is the error? Being blind for realities. Namely that history doesn't >begin at point zero the moment Zappa appeared! It's NOT that ChessBase has the >moral right or whatever but for probably two decades now these people are in the >market with their creativity and smartness. You cannot and shouldn't dispute >that as a fact. But all the questions and ideas here from the audience based on >that fact namely because most of all are users of ChessBase. They don't care >about new GUIs, they want the actual Wch in their directory in their known >FRITZ-GUI. Period. That was the same with REBEL. At one time Ed allowed his >engine to be in FRITZ. And you know why I didn't buy it? Out of bad intentions >towards Ed? No! Only because Ed had made clear that this would be just a >one-time experiment. What, I asked myself, I should now adapt to REBEL engine >and later there is no future? No! > >Where is the problem to understand and see the situation as it _is_? Money >greed? I for one am simply surprised that such bright young people can make so >many mistakes in a row. > > >(2) Gian-Carlo calls a spider a spider and hypocrits hypocrits! > >Now this makes me think if you are really a defense attorney or simply a devil >in disguise. :) > >Let me ask you a personal question. Imagine we all came here with a little >picture of our faces. You clearly showed us your bald pate. And to greet you I >always ask you "How's your bald pate doing today?" Remember a pate is a pate and >I just asked you because everybody knew that already with your pate. So where is >the problem? The point is this here. NB that I want to sell you a nice dressing, >I want to come into business contacts with you. Then I see a wart on your nose, >and I call it a wart and tell you so. etc. Would you really think that you after >all this would still buy anything at all from ME?? > >I myself am famous for speaking out certain truths even if I can't make friends >this way. The reason is that for me the truth is more important than just >collecting "friends". Also because I learned already at school that a real >friend would always be happy if I criticised him for good reasons. Simply >because he wants to profit from my judgement. What are friends worth who are >only my friends because I was creeping into their a***** all the time? > >But in the case of Gian-Carlo the other problem is that the spider isn't a >spider at all! And still he calls it a spider. > >Gian-Carlo has UCI embedding for his SJENG! And he calls people hypocrits who >want to have UCI in Zappa! Bingo! > >Now you and others say (again mathematically correct but without reality >content) that ChessBase itself has no UCI mode for FRITZ! And nobody would >complain! But in the case of Zappa all complained! So what a bunch of hypocrits! > >Don't you see the error? It's not because ChessBase in fact HAS UCI for FRITZ. >No! It has NOT. But the point is that everybody has FRITZ and wants to have the >other engines over UCI. So, why on Earth ChessBase should write UCI for FRITZ? > >I must admit that here one could well imagine different rules in Law and >Business Rules. IF these two would order that to avoid monopolism such a >different treatment would be excluded, THEN newcomers had much more chances than >today. But to insinuate as if the ordinary user is an evil supporter of the >ChessBase monopoly, isn't this a bit too far a stretch? So, here again you see >that in abstract terms you could be right but in reality (as it still is today >and will be tomorrow) you are wrong and always confusing the two spheres or >levels is not very helpful. And above all on the base of our reality you simply >cannot defend that one Gian-Carlo is insulting the members here as hypocrits. >They are not guilty of hypocrisy when they are simply realists.
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.