Author: Frank Quisinsky
Date: 05:21:23 01/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2004 at 07:12:20, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 22, 2004 at 06:27:24, Frank Quisinsky wrote: > >>On January 22, 2004 at 04:51:25, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On January 22, 2004 at 04:25:25, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >>> >>>>On January 22, 2004 at 02:41:13, José Carlos wrote: >>>> >>>>> I know your opinion: pick the money and disappear for a while. >>>>> >>>>> José C. >>>> >>>>Jose, >>>> >>>>sorry, but I have a lot to do and you have to wait of it. >>>>Maybe 20 years ... hope so! >>>> >>>>In the next year I have too many ideas to make a little bit. >>>> >>>>I know that you are now disappointed (unkown the reason, maybe you are jealous?) >>> >>>The reason is clear. >>> >>>People deserve to get correct information when they buy a new program and nobody >>>told them that Ruffian2 is less tested than Ruffian Leiden so they made wrong >>>assumption and tested only Ruffian2. >>> >>>Ruffian2 is not called something like Ruffian 23.06.2003 or beta ruffian or >>>ruffian experimental version that suggest that it is not tested enough so people >>>could not know that it was not tested enough. >>> >>>Situation with free versions is different because people do not pay for them. >>>professional behaviour is first telling people correct information about what >>>they get. >>> >>>I can be only sorry that instead of trying to learn for the future to give >>>correct information you disagree with Jose. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Hi Uri, >> >>sorry, but I cann't saw only one point which is interesting to disucss. >> >>We have two Ruffian versions on the CD. >> >>Ruffian Leiden (the version won the tournament in Leiden). >>Ruffian 2.0.0 >>and the free Ruffian versions ... >> >>For me it's absolutly clear that every programmer try to make his program >>stronger and after compiling you cann't know (in the most cases) ... is my new >>version stronger or not. This is normaly, right or not? >> >>After that the programmer and beta tester have to test a new version. In my >>opinion is this clear too. With other words ... we are speaking about absolutly >>clear things! >> >>All is not a big secret! >> >>If you or others search a version which is stabil and strong we must test in a >>small group a program vs. x other programs more as 6 months with different time >>controls. And this is not possible! >> >>We test Ruffian now one year (different versions) and the result by Per-Ola is >>Ruffian Leiden which won the Dutch-open 2003 in front of Rebel, Tiger, Sjeng, >>King and others. This results are available on the commercial CD-Rom and the >>programmer closed version 1.x with version 2.0.0! >> >>Version 2.0.0 with small changes are on the CD available too. >>Ruffian go in production after Leiden and we can wait one year and test Ruffian >>2.0.0 ... Ruffian will win the tournament in Leiden 2004 and we start a new test >>of one year and as result Ruffian is available in 10 years! >> >>The way Per-Ola go is right. >> >>At the moment Per-Ola is working on an update for Ruffian 2.0.0 and maybe we >>should test this update six months before we give this update free? The most >>Ruffian customers are not very happy about it if we wait a half year :-)) > >You do not need to wait and the problem is only with a name that gives wrong >impression. > >When I read a name like Ruffian2.0.0 then the impression is that it is clearly >tested to be better than previous released versions. > >Uri Hi, again ... If I read Shredder 8 or Rebel 12, Ruffian 2.0.0 is available ... I am sure the engines are new. The definition from "Clearly tested" is for computer chess programs not possible or all programmers are working in version number 0.0xxx! I don't understand the problem Uri, included all the messages in this thread to this topic. If you need a clearly tested Ruffian 2.0.0 version you have to wait 6 months. Than you know the points which are to improved! Give me a chance to understand your point of view: What have the Ruffian team to do if a new version is available (example: Ruffian 2.1.0)? 01. Test the version 1 week! 02. Test the version 2 weeks! 03. Test the version 1 month! 04. Test the version 2 months! 05. Test the version 6 months! 06. Never give the version as update because never is a version "clear tested". Clear is: Test the version from different people because no programmer have 10 computers at home. What do you think what we made with Ruffian? We test beta versions of Ruffian a long time (see for only one example the tournaments on Arena webpages). The result by Per-Ola is Ruffian Leiden! The winner of the Dutch-ch 2003! After Leiden Per-Ola try difference things to make his programs stronger without a long test time. No we have two Ruffian versions on the commercial CD: Ruffian Leiden Ruffian 2.0.0 (the start of a new versions number = a new try to make Ruffian stronger) Now Per-Ola work on Ruffian 2.1.0 and got in the last days / weeks difference message for improved his version 2.0.0! All is absolutly normaly for me, sorry! Again, what is the point where we discuss here? Best Frank
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.