Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 04:01:46 02/15/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2003 at 05:22:05, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 15, 2003 at 03:29:26, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On February 14, 2003 at 08:38:22, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>On February 14, 2003 at 08:25:58, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >>> >>>>I think that programs in the order for being tested am, how they are sold >>>>commercially after date! >>>> >>>>S7 was sold about one month later, than Fritz 8!!! >>>> >>>>Thus normally now first Fritz 8 should be tested. >>>> >>>>I go of it out of that ChessBase Fritz 8 yet did not submit. >>>> >>>>Why not? >>>> >>>>ChessBase know why. >>>> >>>>;-) >>>> >>>>Eduard >>> >>>Are you suggesting they withheld Fritz 8 because they knew it would perfomr >>>better and might hurt Shredder 7 sales, or that Fritz 8 might actually not do so >>>good (unlikely) in which case it might hurt sales of Fritz 8? >>> >>> Albert >> >>SSDF has to be criticized. They claim to be independent, but in fact they are >>not more than a sales argument for Chessbase. They shouldnt have tested Shredder >>7 before they test Fritz 8. > >I think that they test what the programmers want them to test. >It has nothing to do with chessbase. > >Uri They shouldnt test what the programmers want them to test, they should test what the majority of the users want them to test. Therefore it was IMO correct to test the CB-GUI version of Shredder 7 and not the UCI-Version. On the other hand they should have tested Fritz 8 FIRST, even if they had to postpone the Shredder 7 test. Fritz 8 was available before Shredder 7 and the majority of the users wanted to know: Is Fritz 8 really stronger as Fritz 7 and Deep Fritz 7(on single processor) ? Michael
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.