Crafty For iPod

[sje]

I've done some beta testing for Tord's Glaurung for iPhone/iPod Touch that's included many hours of play. And while I'm certainly impressed with the strength of Glaurung on my iPod Touch, it's not *my* program. What I want to do is steal Tord's UCI-like GUI and its nice piece graphics and connect it to Symbolic.

Since Tord's GUI is released under the GPL license, I suppose I'd be required to have a copy of its source available for distribution. That's okay with me as long as the source of Symbolic remains private. I could release the entire executable on Apple's iPhone/iPod Application Store for free, or maybe for US$0.99 a copy to help cover expenses.

Now if I take the time to re-code Tord's UCI-like GUI to make it true UCI (and wholly independent of any connected chess program), then that source could be used by others to build iPhone/iPod Touch versions of their programs. So, if someone had a UCI version of Crafty, then it too could be ported.

Maybe what is needed is to move Crafty towards being a wholly C++ program. A good start might be to separate the interactive command processor from the Xboard command processor, making each a separate class that inherits a general command processor base class. That way it would be much easier to code a UCI handle as a third command processor class.

[bob]

There is another concern that is paramount to this discussion. A normal GUI, as in xboard/winboard, has _zero_ chess-playing ability, and I think it is perfectly legitimate for everyone to show up at an event and use xboard/winboard as an interface to play games in a tournament, whether it is an automated online event or a manually-operated event. But some GUIs go much further than that, playing opening moves, "learning" when a book move is bad and avoiding it in the future, "learning" when a book mvoe is good and preferring it in the future, managing the time usage, playing EGTB moves when the root position is 6 pieces or less, etc. That kind of GUI is perfectly acceptable, but it should only be used by _one_ program. And that is where things break down. One can use some of the available commercial GUIs and avoid having to write anything but the pure search code. I don't think those should be allowed to compete unless the GUI author is a part of the team that is entering a _single_ competitor...

But how can cheating be determined? If I enter Symbolic in an event and use a UCI GUI, how do you know that I'm not using a book by somebody else, tablebases by somebody else, or learning by somebody else? Must I be restricted to the use of Xboard when there's a visually and logically better UCI GUI available?

I suppose I could spool Symbolic's log to a web site in real time so others may see exactly what's happening. But maybe not everyone is willing to do this. Some programs might not even create a log.

It's about the same problem as recognizing that you are using parts of an engine written by someone else. It is a problem of course... Fortunately, most GUIs have a unique display, which serves as a form of identification for recognition.

[sje]

But how can cheating be determined? If I enter Symbolic in an event and use a UCI GUI, how do you know that I'm not using a book by somebody else, tablebases by somebody else, or learning by somebody else? Must I be restricted to the use of Xboard when there's a visually and logically better UCI GUI available?

I suppose I could spool Symbolic's log to a web site in real time so others may see exactly what's happening. But maybe not everyone is willing to do this. Some programs might not even create a log.

It's about the same problem as recognizing that you are using parts of an engine written by someone else. It is a problem of course... Fortunately, most GUIs have a unique display, which serves as a form of identification for recognition.

Yes, the unique display can help, but not in server based remote play.

On the other hand, interfaces do identify themselves to a server when connecting.

On the other hand, the interface identification can be spoofed.

I'm going to work more on the real time log-to-web idea and I'll try to have that running before Symbolic's next tournament event.

[sje]

Glaurung on the iPod Touch in all of its 320x480 glory:

[sje]

And for those who prefer a more traditional display:



The color display by itself beats every dedicated handheld I've ever seen, and the program is surely much stronger than what can be had in any inexpensive dedicated handheld. And unlike dedicated handhelds, the program has network connectivity and can email PGN game scores.

The question is: Is it worth paying US$229 for an iPod Touch? That price is for the 8 GB version, the 16 GB is US$299 and the 32 GB model is US$399. I suppose it depends on the needs of the individual purchaser and also on what other tasks (like playing music and video) an iPod is called to do.