Author: Robert Pawlak
Date: 12:29:40 11/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2004 at 21:11:14, Chuck wrote: >Seems like more of an advertisement than a review. Seriously. > Yes, I think this is a valid point. However, I make no pretense of saying this is a "critical" review. Note that these are hard enough to find on the web. Many people aready have an agenda of sorts. As for my recommendation at the end of the review, I will stand by that, regardless. > >A couple of points to elaborate: >1. Only one negative comment is made, that being an upfront disclaimer about the >dropping of ICC, obviously putting the fire out first. After that, no contrasts >with other programs that put CA in a negative light. This is not a review. It's >a commercial. As for contrasts of other programs, I don't have, and will not purchase CB 9. I guess I could compare it to CB 8, but that would hardly be fair for a couple of reasons: 1. It is an older version of their software. 2. I pretty much only use Convekta software now (see next point). Nearly all or the reviews on www.chessreviews.com were done prior to my starting chessassistance.com. >2. It seems that all of your recent reviews are only of Convekta products (not >to mention you were a beta tester), so I think you should state up front what >your relationship is with the company, if any. Yes, for about a year now, I've reviewed Convekta products almost to the exclusion of all others (exception is Shredder and some PocketPC stuff). If you look at the FAQ on www.chessassistance.com, you'll see that I make no secret of the extent of my relationship with Convekta. Also, the review appears on ChessAssistance, rather than ChessReviews. > >Now my opinion, as a long-time CB8 user, is that Chess Assistant may be a >worthwhile competitor. One issue on which I have no data, is how often it >crashes or corrupts data files. I have know CB8 to occasionally corrupt data >files. > CA is very good about this, I've never lost data with the program (this is even beta testing many, many builds). I had one person on my mailing list report corruption of data, but this was due to accidental deletion of some database files. >Overall, it seems worth a try, especially if the price is less than Chessbase, >and what I've seen of CB9 hasn't impressed me yet. On the other hand, I see the >dropping of ICC for the server chosen as a big mistake. Perhaps giving the >option of another, more international server would have done better? My point >here is I recognize ICC is not the best corporate partner, especially since they The server is very "international". I like playing there quite a bit. I have yet to encounter a player screaming obscenities at me (a fairly regular occurrence on ICC). Almost all I do is play chess on the server, so it suits me fine (I'm not one to chat). >think they already have everything, but the chosen server is hardly acceptable, >in my opinion, to the English-speaking market. Why would I choose a chess web >server that doesn't even have an English help file? No matter how you try to >spin it, your arguement won't fly when there are a number of native English >chess servers out there. I have to sum this up as Convekta choosing the Russian >market over the English market, which is their choice and I'm sure the Russian >market is big, but it does exclude me. Actually, this was a mistake in the review. Download versions of the Chessplanet client don't come with English help. However, I noticed the other day that there is a help file for the client in CA 8. Frankly, I do not understand what the fuss is about English being the native language. As Albert pointed out later in this thread, there is little need to speak Russian (I don't speak much Russian at all). Incidentally, you'll occasionally discover someone from the other side of the world that will want to try their English out on you. Sometiems friendships are born this way. Bob
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.