Author: Anton Worsman
Date: 02:51:04 01/03/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 02, 2006 at 18:27:44, David Dahlem wrote: >On January 02, 2006 at 18:01:55, Günther Simon wrote: > >>On January 02, 2006 at 17:10:02, David Dahlem wrote: >> >>>On January 02, 2006 at 11:34:04, Günther Simon wrote: >>> >>>>On January 02, 2006 at 11:26:01, David Dahlem wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 02, 2006 at 11:07:34, Günther Simon wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 02, 2006 at 11:00:26, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On January 02, 2006 at 10:27:27, Günther Simon wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On January 02, 2006 at 10:01:23, phili_ppe wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On January 02, 2006 at 02:32:23, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Hi Aloisio >>>>>>>>>>I have not idea but do not understand why >>>>>>>>>>you should want to use Polyglot/Winboard. >>>>>>>>>>Try the fine and free Arena-GUI available at >>>>>>>>>>http://www.playwitharena.com/ which is the >>>>>>>>>>best GUI for UCI-/Winboard engines in my >>>>>>>>>>opinion. >>>>>>>>>>Best regards >>>>>>>>>>Kurt >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Hello >>>>>>>>>I use Polyglot for UCI engines for Toga & Rybka but I have noticed the nodes per >>>>>>>>>seconds and the search depth decrease dramaticly with a UCI2WB adaptator. >>>>>>>>>Engine -> Polyglot -> Winboard -> Polyglot ->engine >>>>>>>>>All these ways weaken too much the uci engine. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>That's wrong. You probably just mean the _display_ in WB which _seems_ >>>>>>>>to be decreased (because of a lot of output from UCI engines for the >>>>>>>>first 4 plies). If you look into the debug files you will see that >>>>>>>>your assumption was wrong. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Guenther >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Guenther >>>>>>> I have never used Polyglot and am sure you know >>>>>>> things very well. The main question remains: why >>>>>>> should anybody use an an adapter for a UCI engine >>>>>>> instead of avoiding this by working with Arena GUI? >>>>>>> Best regards >>>>>>> Kurt >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>...because WB is by far the stablest and most reliable GUI, >>>>>>which also uses the least ressources and has the best additional tools :) >>>>>> >>>>>>Best regards, >>>>>>Guenther >>>>> >>>>>Well, WB is not reliable for UCI engines, in fact, needs an adapter simply to >>>>>run UCI engines. :-) >>>> >>>>Even for UCI engines my above message applies ;-) >>> >>>Judging by the number of threads here asking how to run UCI engines in WB using >>>polyglot, in my mind that reliability is in question. :-) >> >>It's more about the reliability of the users as usual ;-) >>Not knowing how to do something is completely irrelevant >>for the matter of Polyglots reliability, but you sure know this. >>May be you forgot about the zillions of threads here, when people >>posted games in whatever GUIs, which were simply flawed by user setups. >>However, if you don't like WB for whatever reason no one forces you to >>use it, but talking bad about something you don't know is simply weird. >> >>Regards, >>Guenther > >Your points all all well taken, but ... an unreliable user will have problems >with any interface. A reliable user who can manage to use polyglot with WB will >have an easy time using an interface that doesn't require polyglot. > >Regards >Dave I agree with Guenther here As a Linux user, I am running Rybka via wine, polyglot, and winboard, without any problems. Winboard is very stable, and is easy on resources, Arena on the other-hand is resource hungry, and is still rather unstable.(important on my sub 1000mhz computer, computer donations welcome :) ) I would argue that winboard must be a great program if users are prepared to set up various add-ons(polyglot, tourney managers etc) rather than use a program where all the add-ons are ready to use out of the box. regards aw.
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.