Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:50:25 10/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 1999 at 20:06:42, Micheal Cummings wrote: >On October 31, 1999 at 11:12:39, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>Dear Michael: >>Maybe this issue is not so black and white as you put it. And besides there is >>another side of he problem. True: most freeware stuff is, if not bad, very >>simple and sometimes unuseful. But then, please take a look at commercial >>software and tell me if 100% of it is superior, good quality, etc. It is not! >>There is a LOT OF CRAP also in commercial software side. I know it very well as >>much as not having money problems and being a man prone to temptation, I >>purchase a lot in the Internet. And you know what? Most things are crap. Pretty >>envelopes, pretty marketing tactics, many promises,etc, but mostly few real >>things to get. And besides we have he effect of what you get and what you wanted >>to get, normally very differents things. In the realm of sotware this dilusion >>is the greatest. Just look at our site and see how many complains produces at >>each step every new commercial chess program. >>PIM? Tere was a time I downloaded almost every PIM offered, freeware or >>commercial, and still I do not use none. Why? Because I am expecting something >>none of them can give to me. >>But returning to your point, I can swear to you that the percetage of crappy >>stuff from commercial origen is very very high, not less than that you can get >>in the freeware arena. In fact, is shameful. Installation problems, bugs, >>desconfiguration of your Config.sys files, flat design, less features than >>announced, etc, etc. It is life, Michael: in nature as in society, almost 90% of >>everything is doomed to failure. >>Fernando > >I take your point. But there maybe some useful freeware on the market. But most >of it is crap. As for free stuff all over the internet, I think in General from >programs that I would actually use, freeware is very little. > >As for free stuff running the internet, which bob pointed out. Well I really do >not care about that software, cause apart from surfing the net with it, I cannot >do much else, and this would only take up 0.01% of what is good freeware. >Freeware chess from my use is crap. Maybe the strength is okay, but the usage >very pretty pathetic. > >That is even though most can still beat me. Given a choice there is not many >commercial programs in chess that I would put down in favour of a freeware >program. I do not use freeware chess programs anymore. Apart from Chess-it, >which is tiny and I can hide on my work computer, it has a nice little interface >and very small program. Here is what I do in a typical week: I edit and compile and debug (using a GUI debugger or a text debugger depending on 'mood') C programs. I write papers using a text formatter. I edit graphical images. I run a browser to prowl the net looking for things. I access many sites via anonymous ftp, as well as provide anonymous ftp for everyone wanting the crafty stuff and Eugene's stuff. I handle about 50 email messages per day, and run an email client with folders, capable of replying to email or postint to usenet depending on how the email was delivered. I read usenet news daily and post to it. I run Java applets. I run network monitoring tools. That is a part of a week's activities. I play music CDs on my sound system thru my computer. I run xboard to access ICC and to allow crafty to play there. The software I use to do all that cost me $2.95 to get a redhat 6.0 CD from cheapbytes. How much did you pay for _your_ software?
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.