Author: G. R. Morton
Date: 17:24:16 01/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 02, 2001 at 17:23:10, Torstein Hall wrote: >On January 02, 2001 at 17:14:32, John Dahlem wrote: > >>On January 02, 2001 at 16:57:54, Roy Eassa wrote: >> >>>On January 02, 2001 at 16:41:00, John Dahlem wrote: >>> >>>>I keep reading that this is an inferior program because it is DOS. But it runs >>>>in windows, so what is the problem? Is it slower in Windows? >>>> >>> >>> >>>Just a few things off the top: >>> >>>1. Doesn't use long filenames. >>>2. Doesn't share clipboard (copy, paste) >>>3. Doesn't use standard techniques for moving/resizing windows and other GUI >>>techniques. >>> >>>Feel free to add more. >> >> >>But the actual playing strength then is not affected, only the ease of use, >>right? > >If you take the time to learn it, the interface is pretty good! The looks of C3 >are not up to the MS Windows standards, but it has loads of possibilities. You >can pretty much configure the interface the way you like it. And in fact its one >of the chessprograms I like most to play with. > >Torstein I agree. In fact I like very much its (and Rebel's) interface potential: I have mine set up with 12 hot buttons giving me 4 (clip boards <---> board), favorite time sets, playing strenths, write to pgn file, player-player mode, enter database, etc, all instantly able to go back & forth with. Tiger13 should have such an easy to set up & use interface. I miss some of the windows potential of the superb Junior interface, but not much. I only wish its playing strength and positional judgment, though certainly good, were as good as I had originally hoped, but then it is SSDF rated 2520 with a fine playing style - not shabby.
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.