Author: Frank Quisinsky
Date: 15:02:57 09/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2002 at 17:43:03, Peter Berger wrote: Hi, >I think that Arena is inferior to costy commercial GUIs. This is not about being nice or being evil, it's about the truth. Which commercial GUI have a better support to: 01. WinBoard 02. DGT For 2 examples. Arena is a very young GUI, please thinking on the first GUI of Lex Loep and other programmers. I will never say that this work from Lex and other GUI programmers is "inferior". The Arena GUI is for me in much things better as every commercial GUI. But this is your opinion and I have my opinion! I would never say to a program it's "inferior". >OK - and I'll bite for once. You don't really say the same for 4 years now at >all. Even last year you still wrote that you thought UCI engines shouldn't be >availlable for free at all but only as a commercial product - you changed your >opinion later .. This is completely false! I saw a chance that amateur programmers can also a make a little bit money with here work. So I am thinking which Gambit-Soft what can we do. The result was the project "WinBoard Edition". UCI in this time was very new and free. So we try to make a little bit for programmers. Gambit-Soft have no interest to make profit with this project. Peter you have a big problem with my person or what is the reason for this sentence. I have all the years the biggest interest that commercial programs are compatible to WinBoard (better compatible to standards). - Phase X pages for Gambit-Soft - detail pages for Winboard engines in English and German. - Every day messages about commercial and free software on my older webpages and and and ... You are not an interesting dicuss partner for me. Only a little bit provocations not more. 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.