Author: Chessfun
Date: 13:18:27 04/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2001 at 16:04:02, Laurence Chen wrote: >On April 02, 2001 at 15:33:41, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: > >>On April 02, 2001 at 09:23:09, Laurence Chen wrote: >> >>>On April 01, 2001 at 23:27:21, Chessfun wrote: >>> >>>>On April 01, 2001 at 22:13:01, Laurence Chen wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>I think the Beta testers failed to check for bugs and they were supposed to >check for all bugs, no for chess engine strenght alone, this annoys me. >>>> >>>>Be serious we do far more than look at the engines. All bugs are reported. >>>>The choice to make changes or not to make changes is the choice of >>>>the programmers. >>>> >>>>From the Rebel Board; >>>> >>>>Kyodai >>>>Member >>>>Posts: 48 >>>>Registered: Sep 2000 >>>> posted 03-24-2001 09:51 >>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>1) I open CP5 and Gambit Tiger is loaded with 96 MB hash. >>>>2) I then right click the board - clear board and enter the following position: >>>>White: Kc2, Rf1 Pawn b2 >>>>Black: Kg6, Rh8 >>>>3) Then finish this set up and hit the icon for analysis mode. >>>>4) No moves are displayed in the statistics >>>>window. At the bottom it reads: "60 minutes--------0-0--------01.00----01.00, >>>>since the >>>>previous used level was game in 60' >>>>5)When I hit "computer move" it looks allright in the statistics window. This >>>>error >>>>happens frequently. What's wrong? >>>>B) I set up a position - play from this against Tiger - save the game and result >>>>as **.pgn - then open this DB - the game is there. When I then try to load it by >>>>double clicking the game - only the result is shown- >>>>no moves. Am I overlooking something simple? >>>> >>>>Kyodai >>>> >>>>-------------- >>>> >>>>lex >>>>Member >>>>Posts: 308 >>>>Registered: Nov 1999 >>>> posted 03-24-2001 11:10 >>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>12345) Is this with Gambit Tiger 2.0 ?? Here it happens when the position is in >>>>the Tablebases, when I disable the TB's it is ok. >>>> >>>>------------------- >>>> >>>>What you speak of was known a while ago. >>>>Also read Jim Walker's post which is clear enough. >>>> >>>>Sarah. >>>I don't go to the Rebel board, so I was not aware of this bug. I also program >>>software for a living, and it's not a good thing for me to implement a bug >>>software in my company because it would irate a lot of users, and my boss >>>wouldn't be happy about. Quality Control is very important, and I wish it was >>>also with software, specially with a lot of commercial software. Sometimes a >>>lot of bugs are not discovered because the users or beta testers fail to spot >>>them, or report them. Take the example of CM8000, it has a lot of bugs when it >>>was release, and I can't believe that they allowed such software hit the market, >>>yes, a patch was made available, but it took at least 3 months before it was >>>made available. This may be all right with a game, but still it should not be >>>used as an excuse. We need good quality software releases, not bug software >>>which are release in order to meet the deadline. I think that's bad marketing. >>>Regards, >>>Laurence >> >>Hmm, I expected a "I am sorry my appologies to beta testers" when I opened your >>post, not this. I can hardly believe that you write "software for a living" >>without knowing that no complex program can be bug free. Even if that would be >>possible it would be a matter of priorities ... >> >>Regards, >>Geor >If we continue to accept that it's all right to buy "buggy" software, then the >people or companies which deliver "buggy" software will continue to do so, and a >vicious cycle continues. I remember that my company bought a piece of software, >and it cost several thousands of dollars, the demo which was sent showed that it >could deliver and perform all the tasks which management wanted, however, when >the day came to use the real thing, it had so many bugs, it was not able to >handle a large scale of users, it could only handle a maximum of 2 users, and >these users had to be in the same segment of the the network, also it was not >compatible with the latest version of Excel, and guess what, the salesperson >promised that if would be. My point is we consumers should take a stand and >refuse to support "bug" software, and hopefully within time, the quality control >of software engineering will improve. Look at cars, would you buy a "bug" car. >The japanese cars in the 60's and 70's used to be like that, very "buggy" and >unreliable. Nowadays, Japanese cars are very reliable. I understand that no >software is "bug" free, but that should not be used as an excuse. Would you >take a trip on a "bug" airplane which is 95% reliable, would you take a chance >on the 5% and hope that the "bug" doesn't show up? > >In US, congress one time wanted to pass legislation against companies which >deliver "buggy" software, because "buggy" software can cost business a lot of >down time and money. Too bad, they were not able to pass that legislation, it >would certainly forced Bill Gates to deliver more solid and reliable OS. I think Georg meant simply that you should have in this case apologized to the Rebel Beta testers. You originally wrote in relation to Tiger 14 and Gambit 2.0; "I think the Beta testers failed to check for bugs and they were supposed to check for all bugs, no for chess engine strenght alone, this annoys me." This statement was simply wrong and should have been apologized for. Don't know about the CM8K nor care about Excel. But I do care about the statement you make relevant to the Rebel testers, which was the subject noted. Sarah.
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.