Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:25:34 04/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2000 at 09:48:32, blass uri wrote: >On April 19, 2000 at 09:23:30, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On April 19, 2000 at 08:57:58, blass uri wrote: >> >>>Because it is not the commercial version. >> >>It should be the commercial version, because that would be fair (sic.). > > >I do not see something unfair in using not the commercial version unless >chessbase hides it. > Isn't this what IBM did with deep blue? Play vs Kasparov with a machine that no one had any games from? Wasn't this the most common whine about that event, that Kasparov was playing an unknown machine. But it is ok if Fritz does this? Guess I don't get it as they sound _identical_. > > > I think >>that the quad implies that the Fritz developing team and/or Chessbase bought a >>"testmatch" from the Dutch Chess Federation. Capitalism strikes again. >> >>>The commercial version does not run in a quad not because the programmers cannot >>>take advantage of a quad but probably because the customers are not interested >>>in programs that can use a quad because they have no quad. >> >>That's not an excuse. A lot of dualboards on the market today, which should be >>supported. > >Probably most of the buyers of Fritz do not use dual boards because this is the >only logical explanation for the fact that chessbase did not release a parallel >version of Fritz when they had no problem to use a parallel version of Fritz in >WCCC and in other tournaments including the match against anand. > >Uri
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.