Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Much ado about nothing

Author: Detlef Pordzik

Date: 15:45:47 09/14/98

Go up one level in this thread


On September 14, 1998 at 05:42:47, Bert Seifriz wrote:

>On September 13, 1998 at 16:57:17, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>
>>On September 13, 1998 at 12:01:21, Bert Seifriz wrote:
>>
>>>On September 12, 1998 at 17:30:35, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 12, 1998 at 16:44:32, Detlef Pordzik wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 12, 1998 at 11:28:50, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 11, 1998 at 22:55:55, Detlef Pordzik wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This program never had a " lobby " over here in Germany; in fact, many of
>>>snip
>>>>Absolutely right. In fact I am certain that the "mass market" path represents
>>>>the future even for us. We call such a program full of bells and whistles, but,
>>>>what a heck is wront in getting more things for the same or less money? If that
>>>>is "mass market" product, I love it.
>>>>Fernando
>>>
>>>Hi, may I remind you that the original question in this thread was
>>>NOT bells and whistles BUT if CM 6000, which has an engine 2.61, would play
>>>STRONGER than engine version 2.55 in CM 5000/5500.
>>>And I am telling you again that you can play a hundred years
>>>against and between these 2 versions and you will not find a
>>>significant difference.
>>>Nobody questions that Johan de Koning is among the top chess programmers.
>>>It was his engine which turned the Chessmaster series from cannon fodder
>>>(CM 2000/3000) to a serious program (CM 4000 onwards).
>>>But my impression is that the KING is too good to be improved and
>>>that Johann is working on a completely new approach and that he will come up
>>>with a new program some time in the future.
>>>Bert/gambitsoft.com
>>
>>Hi Bert:
>>I knew what the thread was about, but sometimes, as in real face to face chat, I
>>like to change a bit the path of the thread, sorry. Of course I would like an
>>even better engine to satisfy my sadomasochistic tendences, but what I was
>>trying to say in the beginning -later was different- is that strenght
>>improvement tends to be less importants and the frills more and more. Frills and
>>differences in the presentation of them; that's the reason I have bought from
>>you some programs to begin with,  so give me a break Bert or you are going to
>>lose a customer (joke of course..:-))
>>Fernando
>
>Hi, no problem with changing the thread. I was in no way angry, just
>wanted to make clear that I have absolutely nothing against this
>program in itself, and that I only doubted an improvement in playing
>strength.
>I mean for around US $ 20 you cannot expect a better bargain than this.
>(And of course we wouldn't like to lose a customer like you!)
>Best Bert!

I'm " out " of the discussion right now - but was a part of it with Fernando
before :-)
by reading this supposed final to + fro.....I can only say ( viewing some other
threads, which remind me strongly of something very unfriendly elsewhere )

IF ONLY each thread could be set in the end in such a common friendly and
respectful manner - but probably that's a wish outta this world...;-(

ELVIS



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.