rybka 1.0 beta

[Romy]

We don't hate Rybka,we hate it's author

#382

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

We don't hate Rybka,we hate it's author

#382

It's good for a man to stick to his guns.....
Dr.D

[Romy]

It's good for a man to stick to his guns.....Dr.D

Is possible for Ammonite to get doctorate in libel?

[Tom Barrister]

blah blah avoid the question blah

Answer the question: If Mr. Rajlich is such a great programmer why does Rybka 4 still have multiple bugs, almost 10 months after it was released?

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

It's good for a man to stick to his guns.....Dr.D

Is possible for Ammonite to get doctorate in libel?

If you failed to finish high school for some reason,don't be mad at people who had achieved a doctorate level....

Working in a gas station and cleaning the cars windshields and taking tips isn't a shame....
Dr.D

[M ANSARI]

blah blah avoid the question blah

Answer the question: If Mr. Rajlich is such a great programmer why does Rybka 4 still have multiple bugs, almost 10 months after it was released?

I don't know why you keep trying to make it look like Rybka was never a strong chess program ... you obviously were not around when Rybka 1.0 beta came on the scene. Rybka 1.0 beta was a tsunami in the world of chess engines ... it was an incredible increase of strength, and was even more impressive because it was still raw and had a lot of areas which were still raw and could gain even more impressive gains. Even with all its flaws it was going through other engines like a hot knife through butter. So please stop trying to change history and stick to the facts. Whatever thoughts you might have against the author is fine, but trying to make it look like his product was not a major event in the history of chess engines is ludicrous.

With regards to why Rybka 4 has so many bugs ... I have my own opinion about that. I don't think that it is as much to do with bugs as the author simply not accepting the fact that what works efficiently in a cluster environment, can be incredibly problematic to port properly to a PC environment. I am pretty sure that most of Rybka 4 bugs would not have existed if Rybka 4 UCI was the only product that Vas was working on. I think after R3 was RE, Vas simply feels that his future lies in a rental cluster setup which is very difficult to RE.

[Tom Barrister]

I don't know why you keep trying to make it look like Rybka was never a strong chess program

Where did I post that Rybka was never a strong chess program?

... you obviously were not around when Rybka 1.0 beta came on the scene. Rybka 1.0 beta was a tsunami in the world of chess engines ...

And all the authors whose work Mr. Rajlich stole from, or in rare cases used legitimately, should be proud of that, and also proud of the likely fact that whatever achievements they made were legitimately obtained.

So please stop trying to change history and stick to the facts.

Please stop misquoting me.

With regards to why Rybka 4 has so many bugs ... I have my own opinion about that. I don't think that it is as much to do with bugs as the author simply not accepting the fact that what works efficiently in a cluster environment, can be incredibly problematic to port properly to a PC environment. I am pretty sure that most of Rybka 4 bugs would not have existed if Rybka 4 UCI was the only product that Vas was working on. I think after R3 was RE, Vas simply feels that his future lies in a rental cluster setup which is very difficult to RE.

Thanks. Now I understand (actually I already did).

Mr. Rajlich is more interested in winning tournaments, so that Rybka has an impressive record,which means he can sell more copies.....than he is in fixing bugs in the program he's already sold to the people who furnish all or part of his living. He's more interested in high-end customers with his rental cluster than he is in the CURRENT customers who 've already shelled out their money for his engine. All Mr. Rajlich gives a damn about is making more money. The people who have already paid can go take a flying leap at the moon.

Well, that might be cool with others, but that doesn't float in my world. I don't see any reason other than laziness, greed, disregard for others, or incompetence, that he can't fix the bugs in Rybka 4 and also work on his cluster project. Both could exist. Nothing had been done in 10 months for Rybka 4 until recently. That's inexcusable. Any company with competition would go out of business with such customer service. Even Microsoft puts out patches more often than that.

I doubt Mr. Rajlich spent much time with the bugfixes: maybe a day? It's too much trouble to give customers a working product. That or he is such an incompetent programmer that he can't fix the bugs. Neither is a good thing for his customers.

[Sylwy]

I doubt Mr. Rajlich spent much time with the bugfixes: maybe a day? It's too much trouble to give customers a working product. That or he is such an incompetent programmer that he can't fix the bugs. Neither is a good thing for his customers.

I think ChessBase GmbH and Convekta (ChessOK) Ltd. must be more interested to offer good products to all their customers. Vas are responsible only for the direct sales.
And from years chess softwares have no warranty toward bugs.Why ?
Read please the README files of ChessBase , Convekta , UbiSoft ,Lokasoft................products !
Why ?
And nobody are scandalized .
Give me your money and..........shut up.
Or is one of Rolf commercial law ?

[M ANSARI]

Let me see ... you said and I quote

If Rybka is so great, why does it suck bananas in the endings? Old Spike 1.2, which is ranked way down in most lists, took a lost 8 piece ending and drew it against Rybka---this at 40/40 time controls. The same position was reversed, and Spike won it easily.

This sounds like you really don't appreciate or will not accept that Rybka was a tremendous breakthrough in chess engine strength. That my friend is ludicrous, and shows that you are relatively new to this. Regardless of what many think of Vas or how he made Rybka ... one thing is certain and that is that you will NOT find one knowledgeable person in computer chess who will claim that Rybka "sucks bananas ..." with regards to playing strength. So if you want to criticize Rybka or Vas ... be my guest ... if you hate Rybka or how Vas sets up his business model with regards to customer service ... again no problem. But please don't try to make it out that Rybka plays crap chess.

[Tom Barrister]

Let me see ... you said and I quote

If Rybka is so great, why does it suck bananas in the endings? Old Spike 1.2, which is ranked way down in most lists, took a lost 8 piece ending and drew it against Rybka---this at 40/40 time controls. The same position was reversed, and Spike won it easily.

This sounds like you really don't appreciate or will not accept that Rybka was a tremendous breakthrough in chess engine strength. That my friend is ludicrous, and shows that you are relatively new to this. Regardless of what many think of Vas or how he made Rybka ... one thing is certain and that is that you will NOT find one knowledgeable person in computer chess who will claim that Rybka "sucks bananas ..." with regards to playing strength. So if you want to criticize Rybka or Vas ... be my guest ... if you hate Rybka or how Vas sets up his business model with regards to customer service ... again no problem. But please don't try to make it out that Rybka plays crap chess.

There's a big difference between saying the engine sucks ata endings (it does) and saying that it was never a good engine, or even that it was an inferior engine in any aspect except endings (and bugs, of course). Therefore, you misquoted me.