Author: Frank Quisinsky
Date: 00:22:38 11/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
Hi, must say this ... For me private are WinBoard and Chess-Base 7 the best GUIs. I know the options in Chess-Base 7 very good, can work very fast with Chess-Base 7 and bevor I spend to many time to learn CA 6.1 complete I work with CB7 (database options for my computer chess games). With WinBoard I can see all what I need. Engines are for me important and WinBoard works here perfect is easy for me. I have fun with CA 6.1 but I must spend a lot of time in the future if I need all options and can work with this. Right Mouse button here and here a I get a long menue with x options. I saw every day new functions, like this. The programmers from Russia (Victor in front of the programmers) make here a fantastic work and have interest to make this perfect (example all my mails last year with testing WB engines under Chess-Assistant and Victor try to make that all engines works here, also engines with 1.800 ELO for an example. For Victor are all engines interesting and not the best engines). People can try CA Light and can see the possiblitys. So I will say, for me private: Chess-Base 7.0 (works fine, I know the GUI, work with CB7) WinBoard 4.2.3 (my favorite program) Chess-Assistant 6.1 (at the moment, if I know all options I think the number 1). Chess-Academy 6.0 (if I sitting at home, and will learn better chess). Also very good are SCID (great free software, and good enough for chess player which will not give money for a chess GUI). Interesting are Shredder, I like UCI (for me the best commercial engine protocol). Will see what Stefan Meyer Kahlen try here on new options for the new version. I hope much more programmers added UCI support in his engines and I hope Chessmaster 8000 are in the next time compatible to UCI. On the other hand ... WinBoard engines works very good in Chessmaster 8000 and the Chessmaster team made here also a great work. I cann't understand why x programmers from Chess-Base cann't try a better WB support if other GUI programmers have here no problems (Chess Partner, Chessmaster, Chess Assistant, Chess Academy). Bad, very bad ... Wit Braslawski (Chess-Academy) told me that UCI is in the next version of Chess-Academy. The Chess-Base engine protocol is not very important. UCI is free and we have better commercial GUIs compare to Chess-Base. So UCI is at the moment the commercial engine protocol number 1, I believe the WinBoard protocol is better :-) Chess-Base Native engines are not free and to play hundrets of games with Fritz and Co. is boring. User get not the newest versions of amateur programs as Chess-Base native engine. To play with the older SOS and Goliath version is boring. User must give every year a lot of money for a new commercial version of Junior or Hiarcs and this is boring because user of WinBoard can try more programs, more versions and the programmers are availalbe in chess fora or help with mail and and and ... this is interesting !! My opinion no a long time ... But maybe the structur from commercial programs are better in the next time. A good way is a perfect WinBoard support in Chess-Base GUIs. At the moment is this support very bad. It is a GUI for a market but not for people wich have interest on 100% engine power and clear is ... the most engines are WinBoare engines (at the moment 111 engines are available). A good compare here (Winboard): Chess-Base is a (VW-Käfer, german car). Chess-Assistant is a (Mercedes). WinBoard is a (Volvo). Best Frank
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.