Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:03:48 02/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 24, 2003 at 15:31:55, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On February 24, 2003 at 15:12:56, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On February 24, 2003 at 14:21:00, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>On February 24, 2003 at 14:05:21, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On February 24, 2003 at 13:37:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>3. The pros are much more organized in testing, and have multiple machines >>>>>dedicated >>>>>to playing programs, with a person or persons responsible for looking at the >>>>>games played >>>>>to see what is going on... >>>> >>>>I have no data to prove that theory and I believe that top amateurs also get a >>>>lot of machine time by beta testers. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I agree that top amateur engines probably get quite a lot of machine time by >>>beta testers aka users, too. >>> >>>But there is a major difference to professionals IMHO - they don't really _get_ >>>the time, decisions what to test or how to test are usually done by the users >>>themselves and the testing is in most cases not organized. Users test what they >>>find interesting, with settings that they are most interested in etc. etc. >>> >>>That's logical as for the beta-testers the testing is a hobby, too, not a job or >>>an organized project. >>> >>>But to draw any useful conclusions from the data is very difficult for a >>>programmer IMHO, even if the beta-testers test very carefully. >>> >>>Decide for yourself - what would you prefer? 6 computers donated to you to test >>>movei on your own, or 10 betatesters who run testmatches with movei as they see >>>fit? >>> >>>I think beta-testing of amateur engines doesn't suffer from too little >>>enthusiasm of the testers, but I am sure professional engines are tested in a >>>much more "scientific" and better organized way. >>> >>>Peter >> >>I do not know how you can be sure about it. >>I believe that there are testers that do exactly what the programmers ask them >>to do. >> >>The commercial programs may have problems to get beta testers >> >>I Remeber a case when Millenium went to court against a beta tester because they >>did not like things that the tester wrote about shredder. >> > >False. It was about that he wrote about a tested prog that he could NOT have had >officially as Stefan had declared. You see the difference? At least that was one >point, there were others. > >Rolf Tueschen I agree that it was not because of things that he wrote about the same shredder that he tested(or had the right to test) but the point is that beta testers of free chess programs usually have no limitation about information that they can post when I never see information from beta testers of shredder and most of the commercial programs about games and results. The fact that a beta tester did not get the right to test the latest shredder is another point because I believe that with free programs the situation is different and the tester is allowed to test the latest version. The point is that the amateurs care more about being better and not about not discovering secrets of things like opening that they are going to use so they can get more computer time. Uri
This page took 2.09 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.