Author: Albert Silver
Date: 15:25:29 01/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
>could make an equally strong case for Chessbase. There _is_ a reason most GM's
>use Chessbase.
Yes, Chessbase got a Windows version in first, and despite being technically
inferior or equal at best in every single aspect to Chess Assistant, it is tough
getting people to relearn a newer system. That's why they continue to use it.
This has been the universal reason, not a single exception, given by the players
themselves when shown what Chess Assistant had to offer. They also like the
looks of Chessbase. However, if you are looking to study, prepare or improve
your game, CA is where it's at. Actually, to be fair, Chessbase has a wonderful
database, the latest offering of Mega2004 for example (though I only have
Mega2003, which I bought and use in CA).
Try having Chessbase analyze a game. Try having Fritz turn on the engine and see
what it thinks of a move.
Albert
>But I digress. I think we can agree, as you stated above, that
>for the casual user a $50 program like Fritz is good enough.
>
>Robin
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.