Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 22:27:58 01/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Walter, > 1. All engine options can be modified within the graphical user interface > so there is no need to deal with ini files. well, a) this is a GUI question, b) maybe for the future this will be a part of an upcoming new winboard specification >2. Much better capabilities to display search information of the engine except the hashtable-usage, there is everything in winboard spec II - and the hashtable-usage is something very unclear... >3. Definition of a principal variation is included, discussed at the moment for prot III >4. It's more robust, the GUI always knows exactly what the engine is doing. Well, I think the WinBoard GUI also knows exactly what the engine is doing... don't see more robustness on the UCI-side >5. It supporting multi variation mode That IS an advantage, but I am sure that it will not take long then WB has it also... >6. Support for endgame tablebases That's up to the engine... MANY WinBoard engines support egtbs... for sure more then UCI-engines exists... or will ever exist, I believe... :) >7. Flexible time controls With prot spec. finally solved... Then WinBoard will have definitely more different time controls then any other protocol... >8. The engine can identify itself That's also possible in WinBoard prot. II >9. UCI is supporting a copy protection mechanism (for the professionals)" WinBoard can do that to... just a checkbox with a "telluser" - check copy protection - maybe another checkbox and finished... Let's get over to the disadvantages of UCI: 1. Not useable as console mode language for testing the engine 2. Not open for new ideas in engine programming, simply the strict protocol does not allow e.g. different pondering ideas etc. 3. Book learning nearly impossible, only with some vague guesses and in next game, so engine will loose time because of learning, same to position learning 4. External own books not visibel 5. Using the engine on ics's not possible 6. No free GUI so far for it 7. No discussion forum about extensions for the feature 8. No protocol version system 9. No way for the engine to see whether opponent is computer or human I could add more points if I want to this list, but what's that good for ? UCI is not bad, but I don't see why it is so revolutionary that anyone should switch... Some addings to the WinBoard-protocol will do the job also... and keep the flexibility where it is needed: at the engine, not at the GUI... Greets, Thomas
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.