Author: Howard Exner
Date: 20:39:26 11/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 2000 at 11:05:36, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Just a simple question: if Rebel Tiger cannot mate with bishop and knight, as >has been said here and nobody has rejected that statement, what kind of work >beta testers did? Are you assuming that the beta testers did not mention this or other criticism's that they had of Tiger or Rebel at the beta forum or by email? It should not stop you or others from posting your own discoveries of a program's limitations. If I were a programmer I'd appreciate suggestions, good or bad, even if I was already aware of them. >Or maybe I am mistaken about what a beta tester does? I >supposed that it is a heavy work, a systematic effort to grasp problems. Now it >seems to me it is not so, at least not always. It seems more or less as a review >where you play the program and from time to time you write a note or two about >the Gui or something than can appear during the game. So if not bishop+knight >situation appears, the problems is not grasped. In fact, that kind of endings >are very rare, but then, if beta testing is just to look at just what appears, I >wonder which is the difference between betatesting and toying. >I have never offered myself to beta testing nothing because precisely of that: I >have no time not the desire to do such a heavy effort in detail. Sometimes in >the past I have reviewed programs -programs that I have bought- and I did that >in confessed subjetive terms, so everyone has been free to take it as a >entertaiment or as some kind of light info, but of course nobody, never, thought >I was doing a full job of the kind K.K - Alan Tomalty- did. I agree that Komputer Korner's evaluations were very thorough especially in the gui analysis. Possibly due to his experience in doing so many of these. Beside's KK's contributions from the past, what other current beta reviews are available for public viewing from other chess products? Are there any non Rebel/Tiger reviews that set a nice standard for future beta testers to follow? That might help future beta testers. Maybe Mogen's upcoming review will give us a model to emulate? Or someone else may submit a review on the the CCC articles page? >So my point is: please, do not engage in such comitments unless you are prepared >to go to the end. Do not do that because I put my faith in what you test, other >people put his faith also and so decisions are taken because we think "well, all >these enthusiastic beta tester cannot be wrong". >Just a last thing: I do not say this from a disppointment with Rebel Tiger. I >like it very much and I am sure that anyway Theron will deliver a patch long >before I ever reach an ending of that kind: in fact it will never happen because >I always surrender with just one pawn less. My disappointment is with my fellows >here, specially with those that sometimes make his comments from the highness of >his status as beta testers but then, out of the blue, facts show thet did not >perform the work as was due to be done. >Sorry if I hurt somebody. All this is writen under the premise B+N mates are not >in Tiger capabilities by now. You'll discover other positions that Tiger and other programs struggle with I'm sure. Keep a record of them and then you can check out newer product versions to see if the programmer felt it necessary to alter the chess code to accomodate the users suggestions. By the way, does anyone know what KK's been up to? He was always very quick to offer a helping hand to posters requiring assistance. His energy for computer chess seemed endless.
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.