Author: Henrik Dinesen
Date: 00:59:47 05/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 2005 at 01:31:51, Peter Skinner wrote:
>On May 12, 2005 at 08:28:20, Peter Fendrich wrote:
>
>>Hmmm, what wrong did Stefan Meyer-Kahlen do to deserve pirates?
>>/Peter
>
>Whenever a person chooses to make his program proprietary to his own interface,
>and basically robs customers let right and center, then he deserves everything
>coming to him and more.
>
>Stefan has seen to it that Shredder will only perform it's absolute best within
>_his_ interface. He _could_ have added the "own book" option to his program, but
>then there would be almost no use for his interface. You _have_ to use his
>interface to use the Neechi book. There is no other option.
>
>Removing the dual support from the regular Shredder 7/8 and offering a single
>cpu and a 2 to 16 processor version is just plain scamming customers. Why remove
>something that has been there for the last two versions? Simple answer.. money.
>Nothing more, nothing less.
>
>If he never added the dual support in the previous two versions then the point
>would be moot. Since he _has_ and now _removed_ it, this is a simple cash grab.
>
>I personally will _never_ purchase his program again, and I know of several
>others that will also _never_ purchase his offerings in the future. Do to the
>fact I am very vocal about problems I see, people seem to feel the need to email
>me and describe their frustrations with the same situation and for the _same_
>reasons.
>
>When the "top" program is a mere 30-40 elo better than #2, really it is a toss
>up when it comes to playing strength. Stefan should have thought about this
>before pissing off his previous customer base.
>
>Peter
Hi Peter,
Yeah, you're right. When it war up the release I asked:
--- mail quote
> I have to admit I was surprised to that see Shredder now also is divided
> into "deep" and not "deep". What was wrong with the selection in the
> settings? Is it a performance matter, convenience, or..? It makes me
> curious.
Mainly commercial reasons, the effort of developing, maintaining and
improving a parallel search is otherwise not worth it.
Best regards
Stefan
--- mail quote end
However, I appreciate he's honesty very much, and a quick answer isn't too bad
either.
Henrik
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.