Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 23:18:11 11/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2000 at 02:00:54, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>On November 04, 2000 at 01:41:24, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On November 04, 2000 at 00:47:04, Andrew Dados wrote:
>>
>>>On November 04, 2000 at 00:00:04, Peter Skinner wrote:
>>>
>>>>>By your definition I would say that Richard Lang's programs between 1985 and
>>>>>1992 are the all time greats.
>>>>>
>>>>>They are still an incredible challenge to many amateur programs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Christophe
>>>>
>>>>I totally agree. We have benefacted from the experience of earlier acheivements,
>>>>just as the rest of the world has.
>>>>
>>>>To say that today's programs are the best of all-time, is a slap in the face of
>>>>the older generation of programs. Nothing has been proved. Today's standard are
>>>>so much higher than they were back then. There is really no comparison.
>>>
>>>Most important thing is processor speed / memory sizes programs were
>>>written/debugged and intended to run. For me all time greatest is definitely
>>>Genius. Get a 486/33Mhz and try it against any of todays top programs. I put my
>>>money on Genius...
>>>
>>>-Andrew-
>>
>>
>>
>>Right, but only because today's commercial programs are Windows programs.
>>Windows slows things too much on a 486-33.
>>
>>Use the DOS version of Tiger and you'll not win the bet.
>>
>>But I agree the match will be close to even, which shows how good Lang's
>>programs were at the time.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>My program ran the same speed on Windows as it did on DOS.
>
>bruce
Mine too, if we speak in term of pure NPS. But the GUI overhead is killing on a
486-33. Just moving the mouse slows down the program a lot. Refreshing the
toolbars takes a long time, and so on...
Christophe
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.