Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 13:06:28 11/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2003 at 10:32:56, Peter Berger wrote: >I found Arena hard to understand and use myself because of the huge amount of >features - things were tough to find for me, and there are still too many >changes for my taste, maybe I am old-fashioned. And when I look for fancy >features, I already own some commercial programs. It is obvious that Arena will >some day replace WinBoard in case there is no further development of WB as Arena >is improving fast. But with this version I appreciated the setup options very >much that allowed to only get the engines :) - I'll probably be a late adapter. That is more or less my opinion as well. WinBoard isn't as fully featured as Arena and the gap is widening by the hour. However, it is very trustworthy. The most important feature of a GUI - in my view - is reliability. It takes a long time for an old dog like myself to trust a different option like Arena. My early experiences didn't really help. Too many bugs made simple use cumbersome and timeconsuming. The same can be said about the abundance of features. So unless you're ready to devote a lot of time on checking and double checking, it outgrows the gradual increase of reliability experienced by the user. At least this user :-). I'm quite sure that most intents and purposes Arena is a reliable product and I do use it for analysis. For everything else there's no substitute for WinBoard as far as I'm concerned. Features aren't everything. Reliability and trust is IMHO. Regards, Mogens
This page took 0.01 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.