Chess GUI

[hgm]

My first commet was "Winboard, ChessGUI, Chessbase, Tarrasch... have a different target group. For what Arena is supposed to be, an userfriendly Freeware GUI with nice graphics for all kind of chess related issues, it is unquestionable the best GUI. "

I am sorry if this is unclear... In this Arena/Chessbase/Aquarium/Shredder class Arena is the best freeware GUI imho.

Well, sorry I missed that. But I don't think at all that WinBoard has a different 'target group' as Arena. It seems to perfectly fit the criteria you mention. And your latest remark I don't understand at all. Chessbase, Aquarium and Shredder are commercial, right? So how is it any recommendation at all that Arena is the 'best' freeware GUI in its class if it would be the only freeware GUI in that class? That would indeed make it quite "unquestionable" (were it not that the classification itself is so quaestionable), but equally meaningless.

[Alexander Schmidt]

But I don't think at all that WinBoard has a different 'target group' as Arena.

I think it has. Arena is something for playing a game, do an enginetournament, use, create GUI books, analysing, database functions, tablebases, graphic shemes and so on. A little bit from everything.

Winboard is for sure a GUI for people who for example search for a stable GUI for enginetournaments or for playing exotic variants. It is different than Arena and some probably prefer it or use both.

Winboard startet the multi engine concept. Without Winboard our community would look different. But the same aplies to Arena, it is a "sexy" GUI with a huge coverage. It has much downloads and is published on magazines. It brings a lot of people to the community.

[facil]

Trying to stay out of the flame wars, I like both xboard and SCID, and I use them both, the first to play in FICS, the second to analyse games and as a database program.

I never used Arena as it's not available under linux, and under windows I was pretty happy with chessbase (never felt comfortable with aquarium) and Jin.

I think at the end you need to look for 3 things in a GUI:

1) Gets the job done. Obviously, for different jobs, you will like some guys better than others. This is why I use both xboard and SCID, each one does the job (for me) best in certain aspects. But at the end of the day, the important part is that the job is done.

2) Ease of use of the interface. The easier, more intuitive, prettier the user interface is, the better. Of course, that is a matter of taste completely.

3) Its price. Free (as in beer) GUIs will be better, other things equal, to paid GUIs. Free (as in freedom) GUIs will be better, other things equal, to freeware and paid software.

As there are many GUIs out there that accomplish 1, the only problem is determine in which cases 2 overweights 3. In my case, the xboard/FICS combo is my only choice, but if I was to run windows again, I think I would stay with that combo, as I'm happy with it, and I do value a lot the freedom those programs give to its users.

[hgm]

I think it has. Arena is something for playing a game, do an enginetournament, use, create GUI books, analysing, database functions, tablebases, graphic shemes and so on. A little bit from everything.

Winboard is for sure a GUI for people who for example search for a stable GUI for enginetournaments or for playing exotic variants. It is different than Arena and some probably prefer it or use both.

I don't understand why you think that WinBoard would only be useful for engine tournaments. (Forget about the variants, they are just a bonus and not important for this discussion.) For one, there is a very large group of users that use WinBoard mainly for playing (as humans) on FICS or ICC. But WinBoard started its life as an interface for playing against an engine, (namely GNU Chess), and is still eminently suited for that. Analyzing games works excellently in Winboard (was this not originally invented with WB+Crafty?) WinBoard does support a GUI book, and does allow the user to edit it. Not sure what exactly youmean by 'graphic schemes'. Not 'themes' for board and pieces, I guess, because WinBoard also provides unlimited choice for that. I don't know what a user could possibly ant from Arena withespect to tablebases; if you would want to probe tablebases in WinBoard, you would simply run an engine that uses tablebases. Woudn't that provide all functionality you want?

So the only true differences I see so far are the database functions and perhaps book building. I must admit I was not aware that Arena had database functions, I always associate SCID with that. I would have to check it out. For converting PGN collections to book people that use WinBoard usually use Polyglot, so there never really was much need to implement it in WinBoard. Nevertheless I am considering to integrate a similar function in WinBoard, not because it would help Chess users much, but mainly because Polyglot does not support variants, and Ialso want to be able to build books formy Xiangqi and Shogi engines.

Winboard startet the multi engine concept. Without Winboard our community would look different. But the same aplies to Arena, it is a "sexy" GUI with a huge coverage. It has much downloads and is published on magazines. It brings a lot of people to the community.

[Alexander Schmidt]

I don't understand why you think that WinBoard would only be useful for engine tournaments.

It was just an example. Of course it can more.

In Winoard you need Polyglot to create books? Another example that Arena is more userfriendly _for beginners_ In Arena you have also an interface to edit the book moves manually, give them values. This is also helpful for opening trainig.

Arena has only simple database function, not compareable to scid. But you can edit a Database in the same interface as you play the games. Thats what I mean, Arena can a little bit of everything.

Of course you can access tablebases in Winboard through an engine. But then you first have to load an engine with tb support, maybe you don't even know which engine supports tablebases.

And about graphics: You can load nice themes with textures, wooden or marple boards and background.

This all doesn't mean Arena is better. It's different to Winboard.

[Roger Brown]

I don't understand why you think that WinBoard would only be useful for engine tournaments.

It was just an example. Of course it can more.

In Winoard you need Polyglot to create books? Another example that Arena is more userfriendly _for beginners_ In Arena you have also an interface to edit the book moves manually, give them values. This is also helpful for opening trainig.

Arena has only simple database function, not compareable to scid. But you can edit a Database in the same interface as you play the games. Thats what I mean, Arena can a little bit of everything.

Of course you can access tablebases in Winboard through an engine. But then you first have to load an engine with tb support, maybe you don't even know which engine supports tablebases.

And about graphics: You can load nice themes with textures, wooden or marple boards and background.

This all doesn't mean Arena is better. It's different to Winboard.

Hello Alexander,

I am seeking clarification on the bold section.

My understanding is that the chessbase gui can probe tablebases once a position appears on the board regardless the loaded engine so whether the engine can or cannot use TB's then the gui plays out the position for the engine.

Is that correct?

Are you saying that Arena does something similar?

With Winboard there is a central reference for the NTBs and their location so all engines that can probe them can find them and use them.

On this point, Winboard does not as yet support the centralisation of bitbases or Gaviota bases, both of which I believe that ChessGui and Arena now support so that would be something to look at when H.G. next finds himself with some time. The list of engines using GTB's is small but I think it will grow with time....

Later.

[tomgdrums]

Who mentioned legal action??? Better to hang him from a tree. By his ears! (A sequoia...)

I am making a genuine attempt to bring us back to a productive discussion about computer Chess, and you only reply with accusations about 'provoking people'. So who of us is seeking conflict??? So far your chessic contribution to this thread has been disapointingly meager, the only thing you seem interested in is criticizing my posting behavior, which is the moderator's business, not yours. I, at least came here to provide a link and info requested in the leading post, before you started to distract from the topic. Talk Chess, or go away!

Hello H.G.,

I would like to talk about Winboard.

Winboard is a gui for playing chess and other board games of perfect knowledge.

Where do you think its chess related applications should stop?

Chessbase for instance is a database handling program, Fritz the chess-playing program. On the freeware side there is Scid and Winboard.

Are your design considerations affected by existing applications already out there - you integrated a tournament function into Winboard despite the existence of more than adequate WBTM's for instance - or is it that you see Winboard as a one stop shop for chess related needs, whether database or chess-playing related?

Or is it what fascinates you as users make their wishes?

On a related note, I think what most persons regard as "geeky"about Winboard is the winboard ini and the installation of engines. There is a software to deal with the ini but perhaps the installation routine - which you have pondered previously - could be looked at.

Later.

Hey Roger!

How come no one mentions Chesspad as a database/gui ??

It seems pretty good! And relatively easy to use. My favorite GUI hands down is still Shredder Classic. It's database functions are limited but for playing, analyzing and studying it is my favorite. I am messing around with Chesspad right now and think it might be my "database" application.

ps. Chess Partner also seems to be an underated GUI.

[Alexander Schmidt]

Is that correct?

Are you saying that Arena does something similar?

Afaik yes, though I have to admit that I didn't look at this feature yet

[Roger Brown]

Hey Roger!

How come no one mentions Chesspad as a database/gui ??

It seems pretty good! And relatively easy to use. My favorite GUI hands down is still Shredder Classic. It's database functions are limited but for playing, analyzing and studying it is my favorite. I am messing around with Chesspad right now and think it might be my "database" application.

ps. Chess Partner also seems to be an underated GUI.

Hello Tom,

I see that Chesspad 2 is out and represents a major step forward.

Thanks for reminding me about that gui. I will have a look at it, looks interesting.

I fire up Winboard from a start menu item so I do not get out much...



Later.

[hgm]

In Winoard you need Polyglot to create books? Another example that Arena is more userfriendly _for beginners_ In Arena you have also an interface to edit the book moves manually, give them values. This is also helpful for opening trainig.

Well, the latter thing also works in WinBoard. Just use Edit Book from the Edit menu, and you can alter the book weights, and delete or add moves. I see no difference there. And as I said, I am indeed not very happy with the inability for WinBoard to create the books itself, (apart from this hand editing), so it will probably be not too long before WinBoard can doitnatively. But I see that more as a small minus for the user-friendliness in this respect, than as a "can't do". (Unless you are interested in the variants, but they played no rule in this discussion.)

Arena has only simple database function, not compareable to scid. But you can edit a Database in the same interface as you play the games. Thats what I mean, Arena can a little bit of everything.

Well, I really know zilch about database usage, I have never done that, and cannot even imagine what kind of functionality people would expect for this. The furthest WinBoard gets is allowing you to select a subset of the games in a PGN file based on their tags.

Of course you can access tablebases in Winboard through an engine. But then you first have to load an engine with tb support, maybe you don't even know which engine supports tablebases.

Well, if we really have to cater for users that are that ignorant, it would still be only a matter of configuring. It is trivial to pre-configure the WinBoard install such that one of the engines from which the user can choose is called "tablebase". Perhaps I should indeed consider this. (Contrary to what you might think I do not engage in these discussions to start flamee wars, just to get ideas for how things can be further improved.) I actually think that this would make it conceptually much easier for users (let computer suggestmoves => use engine) then hiding it in some obscure menu.

And about graphics: You can load nice themes with textures, wooden or marple boards and background.

Well, how is that different from WinBoard/XBoard, then?


Wood + one of the many alternative piece sets (Chess Mark)


Marmoleum board


Marble board

This all doesn't mean Arena is better. It's different to Winboard.

Well, we had not gotten to that point yet, really. The issue was whether you could say that WinBoard targets an entirely different group of users than Arena. Apart from the database issue, there seems no real difference in the offered functionality. And it is hard to believe that this database thing should now suddenly be all important, as I had never even heard it mention in connection with Arena.