Author: Micheal Cummings
Date: 22:09:43 09/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 28, 1999 at 22:47:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 28, 1999 at 20:18:18, walter irvin wrote: > >>On September 28, 1999 at 20:00:32, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>Whenever Bob decides to start doing some major hacking on 17.x, I hope that he >>>packs off a configured 16.last to SSDF, who could test it out on a 450 and see >>>how well it is stacking up in autoplayer matches. I know Bob doesn't care >>>comp-comp much, but it would be interesting to see nonetheless. >>> >>>Dave >>people might be shocked just how well crafty stacks up against , the chessbase >>elite . if bob ever decided to sell crafty , he would out sell every body >>.crafty has no glaring weakness . on the plus side it has it all , even smp >>which i think is a big deal .plus every body is familiar with crafty , has a >>large following . > > >I would have to disagree with the "outsell everybody". A while back, a CCC >Poll question asked who would be willing to buy crafty if it was to go >commercial (not a question I suggested as this is not in any plans of mine at >all)?" The answer was that out of maybe 150 folks, I think 1-2 said yes, the >rest said "no". Which further convinced me that commercial aspirations were out >of the question, not that they ever were a real option... > >:) Depends on actually what you would get with a commercial crafty. I am one to buy programs which have an interface. Rebel, CM6K, Shredder. As for adding engines if that was all you were offering, even if it could only be gotten commercially, I would not buy it, like I would not buy any other seperate engine without a interface.
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.