Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 14:13:03 04/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 28, 1998 at 16:59:18, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>By a logfile using a special program written by Ed. With it we checked >>several programs while autoplaying, including Fritz 5. Nothing, >>*NOTHING* was wrong with any of these programs. It was a good enough >>proof for Ed and in no way I believe you are a more qualified judge. > >That is not the question. It is. There is no other question regarding the autoplayer of Fritz 5. >My point is not that he or me is more qualified, or even you. >My point is that the programmers who critizised the exception will have >to prove, and even if also They will not find anything, it remains: >the ssdf - guys have made an exception for ChessBase. >Why ? >They have not made an exception for Turbo-Kit Schaetzle+Bsteh, >they never made an exception testing hiarcs on the same machine than >genius, but they make exceptions for Fritz5 ? >Why ? > >>> When the programmers who had >>>complains about the usage of it, have proven it, than it is proven. >> >>Then it is proven... >> >>>I don't think that you are a programmer having had complains. >>>You seem to be a tester enrique. >> >>And Ed Schröder is a programmer that did complain about the use of this >>autoplayer in Fritz 5. Will this be good enough for you? Somehow, I >>doubt it. >> >>Enrique > >He did not sign the open letter. SO WHAT???? >But you are right, he complained. >He is IMO ONE of the programmers who can prove it. Then? He did... >But still the question remains: why an exception for ChessBase when >there have been no exceptions for 10 other companies in all the years ? Crap. Genius 4 for DOS was tested by the SSDF. It did not exist in commercial form, it was not available to any programmer. Enrique
This page took 0.01 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.