Author: Frank Phillips
Date: 04:32:17 03/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 12, 2005 at 07:21:31, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On March 11, 2005 at 15:51:50, Frank Phillips wrote: > >>On March 11, 2005 at 05:32:07, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >> >>>On March 10, 2005 at 16:36:30, Frank Phillips wrote: >>> >>>>On March 10, 2005 at 09:24:14, Andrew Williams wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 10, 2005 at 08:29:02, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 09, 2005 at 12:13:26, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>After the post on how Daniel Mehrmann is still working on XBoard/Winboard, I >>>>>>>immediately starting thinking of ways to waste his time. My question is: Does >>>>>>>Winboard really have any advantages over UCI any more? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The Anthony WB/UCI comparison: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>+UCI: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Interface is cleaner & easier to implement, not being based on the crappy GNU >>>>>>>chess protocol. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Supports Multiple PVs, refutations, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Graphical configuration of engines. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>+WinBoard: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Can operate in text mode. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>And this comparison is (obviously) quite favorable to UCI, although I may have >>>>>>>missed things. Anyway, I'd be willing to help Daniel out over the next few >>>>>>>weeks if it meant a new version of Xboard with UCI support, and I'm guessing >>>>>>>there would be a few other people willing to help out as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>anthony >>>>>> >>>>>>The current situation is quite ok - every author implements the protocol he >>>>>>prefers, and adapters exist to make sure that every engine runs in every GUI. >>>>>>(Except Fritz & Junior -- gggrrrr :)). >>>>>> >>>>>>Personally, I'm quite sure that UCI support requires less code and less of a >>>>>>mess in your engine - but it's really a minor issue. It was quite easy for me to >>>>>>decide for UCI. >>>>>> >>>>>>As for GUIs - if you haven't already done so, I'd suggest you at least try the >>>>>>professional GUIs. I doubt it's worth it to try to get winboard caught up .. >>>>>> >>>>>>Vas >>>>> >>>>>Lots of people develop on Linux. I'm not going to suddenly start using Windows >>>>>to do chess programming when I use Linux for everything else. >>>>> >>>>>Andrew >>>> >>>>I would like to second that. >>>> >>>>It is depressing if the suggestion is that all (hobby) chess programmers should >>>>have to agree to the MS licence and fund their 'business' tactics - or write >>>>their own GUI. >>>> >>>>Frank >>> >>>Yes, this is a good point. I worked in Unix until 2003 and can sympathize with >>>this. >>> >>>You shouldn't kid yourselves though - and probably you don't - in many cases you >>>pay a price when you cannot use Windows apps. Maybe it's not right but it's just >>>the reality. >>> >>>Vas >> >> >>It is small compared to the price of using MS Windows; and infinitely small >>compared to the price of having no choice. >> >>Frank > >Software is by nature pretty cheap, compared to the time you spend working & >playing with it. The cost of MS and other software to replace GNU/Linux software on my machine would be far greater than the cost of the machine. I used to have four machines in a network. For each I would need a unique copy of MS this and that. Good for MS, bad for me. > >I don't like the idea that the lack of competition will let M$$ do what they >want - but I think it's enough that everyone optimize their own decisions, and >the market will take care of itself. > >Vas If there was a free market, perhaps. But companies like MS control the market to avoid competiton. They long ago ceased to survive by competing on the products they sell. Frank
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.