Author: martin fierz
Date: 04:29:08 03/31/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 31, 2004 at 07:01:51, Tord Romstad wrote: >On March 31, 2004 at 06:15:05, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>Patriot was NOT strong enough to become commercial, since there are a lot of >>free engines such as: Aristarch 4.41, El Chinito 3.25, Smarthink 0.17a, and >>Delfi 4.4 that are much stronger. In order for a program to qualify as >>commercial it should be much better than the top Free engines available. > >With risk of stating the obvious: Every engine programmer is free to sell >his engine if he wants to do so. Of course, the likelihood that a lot of >people will buy it depends to some extent on the playing strength. > >Saying that a program is not worth buying because there are free engines >of comparable or higher strength is also too simple. There are many other >important factors here. From a commercial engine you expect the software >to be more polished and less buggy, and to have a richer set of features. >You are also more likely to get support from the developer. > >I would even claim that strength is relatively unimportant to the average >user today. Can you really notice the difference in playing strength >between Phalanx and Shredder when you play against them? > >Tord i guess in this example i can. but i hardly ever play against engines. i use them to analyze positions i'm interested in, mostly my own games. and there it is important to me that the engine is good! cheers martin
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.