Author: Albert Silver
Date: 20:33:30 12/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 2005 at 23:12:18, Sherry Windsor wrote:
>On December 13, 2005 at 23:02:12, Andrew Walker wrote:
>
>>On December 13, 2005 at 22:40:59, Sherry Windsor wrote:
>>
>>>First of all Moderators CHOOSE to run for the job. They know they are not
>>>getting paid, this is a position they seek willingly for whatever reason,
>>>perhaps makes them feel real strong when they can pick on a new member like me?
>>>And for what? (i said hiarcs sucks) wow this is a earth shaking crime. Or is it
>>>simply an unpopular opinion? Is this against the Charter? What's worst is this
>>>Heavy Handed (illegal) Moderation action instead of being uniformly condemned
>>>actually gets praise from a few misguided souls. What's the world coming to
>>>Geez. Your job would be a lot less stressful if you didn't try moderate things
>>>you really have no control over, like others OPIONIONs. I know many of you live
>>>in a Fantasy world but in the real world not everyone agrees, and some disagree
>>>Strongly. Grow up and get over it.
>>
>>If you don't like it, find somewhere else to whinge, and leave us to discuss
>>computer chess.
>
>
>
>
>Wow Great Attitude!!
Look who's talking. I take it that you have owned at least one version of Hiarcs
and was deeply unsatisfied with it, to the point of thinking it sucked. Which
version and why?
Personally I have owned every version since Hiarcs 6, and it is pretty hard to
understand your position given that it has been regarded as a top engine since
at least then. Hiarcs 7 (I bought both the DOS and the CB version) for example
topped the SSDF list when it came out, which really can't be considered as
sucking. Kasparov himself declared Hiarcs as the smartest program around at the
time of Hiarcs 6 (I'm not 100% sure of the version he was speaking of), which
also would seem to contradict your statement.
Hiarcs has always been regarded as a fascinating and intelligent engine by those
knowledgeable. The biggest issue is that this isn't simply like talking about
the merits of who makes the best cheesecake or something. Chess performance is
highly quantifiable and Hiarcs has never failed to shine. So if you're going to
make a blanket assertion like that, especially in a forum that caters to not
just enthusiasts, but also to programmers and developers, be prepared to back it
up, since otherwise you're just insulting those who enjoy it, and those who work
hard to develop it.
FYI, Hiarcs 10 is on my MUST BUY Christmas list, and would remain so even if
Uniacke himself declared that Rybka held a competitive edge over it. You know
why? Because even though Kasparov might hold an edge over Karpov, Karpov will
show a different angle and better moves at determined junctures.
Albert
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.