Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 06:56:00 07/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 05, 2005 at 08:41:25, Madhavan wrote:
>Its better to release a standalone engine with its own GUI,when a programmer
>gives protocol support for engines,his programming economy decreases.
>
>It's either of 2 reasons,programmer will obtain less amount or testers do tests
>reporting result and detecting bugs.
>
>player 'd too become a tester,sometimes he gets bored always being engine's
>victim.
>
>I'd like to know if there are anyone who play chess with chessbase and who don't
>test engines?
>
>I happen to know that there are many people out there who dont know what's
>computer chess or that computer program can play with another program by
>protocol.that would be chessmaster buyers.
>
>Ironically if you ask someone "do you know Deep Junior"? "Shredder"?
>probable answer is "I don't know,what it it?"
>
>If you ask some CD buyers "Do you know chessmaster"
>most probably the response from them would turn out to be positive
>
>you bet.
>
>Do you agree with the idea of releasing chess program that should come with its
>own GUI?
>so.is vincent planning to exactly do this?or also Bruce?may be.
>
>
>having more chess GUI's seems to be interesting,we have enough chess
>engines.what do you expect to have?many chess engine,some clones can be
>detected.
>
>I don't understand why anyone would reject this idea?
It's in my opinion a stupid idea that all chess programs
should come with its own GUI. To write a (good) chess
program is much and hard work and why should a programmer
waste his time with developing an own GUI. There a enough
fine GUI's available already.
Kurt
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.