Author: Aaron Tay
Date: 08:28:17 01/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2002 at 18:39:02, Peter Berger wrote: >On January 25, 2002 at 18:17:40, Walter Eigenmann wrote: > >>>>From all that I've read about UCI, it seems to have several technical advantages >>>>over Winboard. >>> >>>Name one. >> >>Look at this: >> >>" What are the advantages of UCI compared to Winboard? >> >>1. All engine options can be modified within the graphical user interface >>so there is no need to deal with ini files. >>2. Much better capabilities to display search information of the engine >>3. Definition of a principal variation is included, >>4. It's more robust, the GUI always knows exactly what the engine is doing. >>5. It supporting multi variation mode >>6. Support for endgame tablebases >>7. Flexible time controls >>8. The engine can identify itself >>9. UCI is supporting a copy protection mechanism (for the professionals)" >> >>(in: Aaron Tay, http://www.chesskit.com/aarontay/Winboard/Winboard5.html#[E.10] >> >>Walter > >Oops - you definitely did quote correctly. Maybe you should also have mentioned >Aaron's next line: [Taken from UCI technical Specification in Richtext format ] Exactly. Please quote the source, I find it strange my name being quoted as the source of this. >Let's get the sources right ( no accuses , Aaron's page is misleading here I >think): > >http://www.it.ro/ccc_search/ccc.php?art_id=141612 How is my page misleading? The whole post you point to is part of the so called UCI technical specificiation, by the UCI authors..Both are exactly the same. >So these are the advantages of the UCI protocol over WB >(/protocolVersion=1)according to one of the UCI authors. > >Regards, >pete
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.