Author: Albert Silver
Date: 22:44:27 02/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2000 at 01:09:07, Vincent Vega wrote:
>On February 12, 2000 at 00:50:02, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>>What is the best-selling chess program? What made that program best-selling
>>>when it's strength was well behind other?
>>
>>Best-selling program whose strength is well behind others.... Beats the heck out
>>of me. Which?
>
>Whose strength _was_ well behind others. Don't twist my words. A: Chessmaster.
I don't think Chessmaster was _well_ behind others.
>
>>
>>Yes, you do. That is exactly what you did.
>>
>
>No, I stated that I worked on a medium-sized program before. That's not a
>resume (at least I hope it's not :-). _You_ have a problem accepting this
>statement without my resume.
Of course. You state that the interfaces of all chess programs are ridiculously
poor on a number of levels yet give no explanation as to what your complaints
are. Instead you put forward that you are an expert in interfaces having just
finished a complex one just now. The only problem is that your position as an
authority (as no arguments were presented) resides right now on a recently
finished project made by a movie character name working in a mystery company.
That's quite a magic trick. Also, you now sweep it under the carpet by hinting
that this is in fact but one of _many_ projects. Fine. Are they all secret as
well?
In the one instance you show the problems you perceive with commercial
interfaces (you had already said that amateur ones need not concern themselves
being free), you choose an amateur program, and make a large list full of
problems that don't exist in today's commercial programs. Take the top
commercial programs, and show me what is so terrible that they should hide their
reddened face in shame.
Albert Silver
This page took 0.01 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.