Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: OT:Re: chessbase

Author: Peter Berger

Date: 03:09:54 03/25/01

Go up one level in this thread


On March 25, 2001 at 04:06:37, Thorsten Czub wrote:

>On March 24, 2001 at 19:59:41, Peter Berger wrote:
>
>could you please enlighten us about the sense of your comments ? thank you.

I was simply making a sneaky remark about the following lines :

"Chessbase provides the best chess engines at a very affordable price.
Chessbase provides the best interface for chess engines.
Chessbase is the standard by which all others are judged."

These like similar statements make me wonder if this is some kind of religion .

I own a few Chessbase programs and I like them ; I own some others , too , which
are also fine .

I am not especially in favour of a situation where there is only one interface
left so I am not too happy with a Chessbase/Tiger but this is only an opinion .

Statements like the above keep getting repeated several times by several users
until probably they get accepted as the simple truth .

This is like Mr Irazoquoi claiming that Chessbase programs have been leading
everybody's list for 3 years now forgetting about CM6000, Hiarcs 7 and Tiger 12.

Statement 1 : Best prices ? I think the Rebel 11 package or CM8000 have much
more reasonable prices . Also I am not in favour of this selling of things like
"Fritz Endgame Turbo" which every user can build for him/herself .

Statement 2: Is this about the GUI ? Well , the GUI is fine . CM8000 and
ChessPartner or Shredder are fine , too . Every interface contains a few things
the others don't have . It's also obvious that the different companies learn
from each other and these functions are usually in the next version of the other
company , too , which is great for us users .

Statement 3 : Hmm , can't comment on this .

pete






This page took 0.08 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.