Author: Keith Kitson
Date: 13:02:43 05/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 1999 at 17:47:44, Dann Corbit wrote: >On May 26, 1999 at 17:17:42, Robert Pawlak wrote: > >>There's been an awful lot of teeth knashing concerning the new Rebel-CP. While >>there is some justification for this, consider that there may be some very good >>reasons for Ed's decision to go this route. >> >>Has it occured to anyone that Ed may still be developing his own windows GUI for >>Rebel? Possibly (and this is only conjecture at this point), this development >>may be occuring in parallel with that of rebel-CP. Perhaps the schedule slipped >>on the rebel-developed version, and Ed was forced to take measures to placate >>the people that were told there would be a windows version of Rebel this summer. >> >>In any case, this would be an honorable decision on his part. His customers get >>an improved engine and windows interface, at the time that it was promised. Ed >>gets to pay everyone's salary and continue development of a standalone Rebel for >>windows. >> >>The CP interface is not all that bad. It does not stack up to Fritz, but few >>programs do. It still has most of the features that people need, including >>support for variations, and opening book tools. Asking for Rebel to produce a CB >>compatible engine will not make it happen. Ed has stated many times in the past >>(in no uncertain terms) that this would not be an option. >> >>Furthermore, the CP interface will at least have a decent 2-D board, which took >>Chessmaster YEARS to develop. The lack of 3D and other unecessary features >>should not really be an issue. Rebel's strong point has always been it's playing >>style, and this should be unobscured by the UI. >> >>Really, I think people are going a bit overboard on this. >For me, functionality is the key. I *hate* all three-d boards, except a "real" >one. I wish the commercial programs would be as functional as Winboard. > >The biggest benefit of a Windows version of Rebel for me is that I don't have to >switch my computer into DOS mode (which currently means that I can only run >Rebel at home, since my work machines get pop-up messages at night, which cans >my batch runs). > >I expect Rebel to run much better under NT than DOS anyway. This is the first mention I have seen of NT(3.51 or 4). Is everyone burying their head in the sand? No-one seems to want to discuss the advantages of running 32Bit chess progs under Win95 in comparison with NT4. I don't understand the animosity towards CP. It is a well written interface and complies with the windows standard. Fritz is nice but totally non standard. I have dowloaded CP and I have several of the other top chess programs and the complaints posted here are not warranted....IMHO. Why don't you give the combination a chance? A lot of you have all decried the CP frontend for Rebel without even seeing the finished product. I say lets wait and see what the first product looks like first.
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.