Author: Albert Silver
Date: 06:11:38 02/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 14, 2000 at 01:33:04, Vincent Vega wrote:
>On February 13, 2000 at 01:43:27, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>That isn't, and never was, the issue. If you are going to declare yourself as an
>>authority on anything, then you must also be prepared to back that up. If not,
>>say nothing and merely present your arguments. I see no reason why I have to
>>take this on faith.
>
>My authority on the subject was proven by finding and giving you two long lists
>of problems in two programs that have good UI's compared to others. If was able
>to do so quickly and easily. You requested specific examples of what's wrong
>with UIs in current programs. I have taken a program with a comparably good and
>praised by many UI, Winboard, and I have given you multiple very specific
>examples of what could be improved. You weren't satisfied, arguing that
>Winboard was an amateur program, and that you needed to see some examples for a
>commercial program. I agreed that this was valid reason and again I have
>created a very specific and long list of things that could be done better in
>Fritz's interface. Your demands have been met with much better data that anyone
>could hope for in any kind of exchange, yet you continue to make attacks on my
>supposed lack of back up. This position seems extremely illogical and
>disingenuous as you have received more back up than anyone could want and you
>failed to address it.
In order to address it, I have to take the time to print out you list, run up
Fritz 6 and start looking at it more closely. Otherwise I'll be doing your
effort a disservice, which I don't wish to do. My time has been somewhat short
as of late, so I've only responded to a few other posts that can be done in less
imte. I will respond, but it won't be based on your being an authority, but
based on the arguments you presented. Why should making a list of what you found
wrong with a program suddenly back up your claims as an authority? KK used to do
that all the time, big deal. Arguments are another story as they depend only on
themselves.
Albert Silver
>
>>I'll answer this later as I have no time now (it's 4:40 am here in Rio). One
>>question though: what is your definition of an interface? There were a number of
>>things that seemed to have nothing to do with what I believe to be an interface
>>issue (ex: slow drawing of 3D pieces). Also, some things seem completely
>>subjective and I cannot regard as making it a poor interface for as much (ex:
>>using radio buttons instead of checkboxes).
>>
>As Dave Gomboc stated, slow display update is definitely an interface issue and
>radio/checkboxes issue is not a personal preference. I expect that you will
>prepare a detailed rebuttal to all the interface issues I’ve raised or you will
>accept my criticism.
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.