Author: Howard Exner
Date: 07:44:07 11/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 09, 1998 at 05:54:39, Ed Schröder wrote: >> Ed in the past i have imagined the possibility of two programs(Engines) >>working in unison to produce a stonger program. Indeed i believe that this >>merger between Rebel and Tiger can be a fruitful one. However i think that it >>is faulty for you NOT to attempt the straightforward multi engine feature such >>as Fritz, Millenium and Junior have for this reason. Indeed if you create a >>program that you CAN SHOW to be the absolute strongest then yes it will sell, at >>least until it is overtaken by another program. And that program might even be >>an engine for fritz or millenium. If it is, then the owners of Fritz or Mill >>will have the strongest programs plus the FANTASTIC feature of other >>engines(hiarcs, nimzo etc). It is true that people want to have the strongest >>program, but it is my oppinion that MOST people are more interested in a variety >>of playing styles(multiple engines). The ease of moving from one chess program >>to another without having to start up an entirely different program is EXTREMELY >>attractive. I read on the gambit soft page "Do people really want to keep >>looking at the same GUI" as if that would bore them, well i'm sorry to say no >>they are not going to get tired of the interface because the MOST IMPORTANT >>thing is the moves produced, not what a prog looks like. Besides that i could >>look at the fritz GUI for the next 20 years and be happy with just the few >>engines i have now. > >>You are fallling into Henry Fords trap(founder of ford automotive)- He wouldn't >>go with the times and start adding fancy features and colors to the Model T car, >>because he said people will always take price and quality over frills. A few >>years later GM(general motors) was the top manufacturer in the world, despite >>the fact that Ford had more capital and previously a monopoly. This is because >>they offered color and frills, because that's what people want. The problem >>with you however i don't think you will survive like Ford automotive has. You >>do not have time to wait to start getting into the multi engine market. If you >>had included the possibility of multi engines in Rebel(besises earlie versions >>of rebel) i'm sure it would have sold 30% more than it has currently. > >Based on my own information I can say the "engines" are hot here in CCC >but that most people simply in the end pick (prefer) one program. > >Of course the REBEL-TIGER approach will end-up as separate engines too >in a Windows environment but the extra will be that we will try to join >forces in: >a) exchanging ideas to make both engines stronger. >b) try to create an automatic referee (3-HIRN approach) Even within Rebel 10 there seems to be something like that #-HIRN idea. I'm referring to Rebel's assesment of a position then deciding upon an AntiGM setting (Off, Strong or Active). I have a question about the other Rebel 10 settings. When Selection is set to normal what does that mean? Does it assess the position and choose a selection accordingly ? Or does it pick one selection setting and stick with it throughout the game? Ditto for Play Style options. Do those vary throughout the course of a game when "Normal" is chosen - sometimes solid or sometimes agressive? Or does normal mean just this one setting? > >At the moment we investigate if there is a (very) quick way to include >Chess Tiger in Rebel10 as an engine (same approach as loading older Rebel >engines). Any idea of the cost to purchase the Tiger add-on if made available? If it turns out this will cost months we will drop it and focus >on Windows. > >- Ed -
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.