RE chessbase light

[Terry McCracken]

Why you are arguing about crappy shitty and completely useless program which nobody likes except one CB supporter and advertiser?

Never used and will never use garbage CB products. End of story.

Hmm...Anand, Carlson, Kramnik just to mention a few use ChessBase products. Do you know more about chess and chess software/databases then they do?

Anyway, I think you're being unreasonable and rude.

[Milos]

Hmm...Anand, Carlson, Kramnik just to mention a few use ChessBase products. Do you know more about chess and chess software/databases then they do?

Nope. They just get money to advertise CB products. That's called sponsorship.
The same as some members of this forum...

[Terry McCracken]

Hmm...Anand, Carlson, Kramnik just to mention a few use ChessBase products. Do you know more about chess and chess software/databases then they do?

Nope. They just get money to advertise CB products. That's called sponsorship.
The same as some members of this forum...

You're wrong, they use ChessBase products. I know you have trouble with facts.

Also, ChessBase is on topic and the members mau discuss it at length. If they approve they aren't sponsoring ChessBase, they're not getting paid.

Sponsors get paid.

[menniepals]

I only use Stockfish. But I think I need to try other engines as well.

[bhandelman]

Nope. They just get money to advertise CB products. That's called sponsorship.
The same as some members of this forum...

Oh man, I hope my check is in the mail because as much as I love ChessBase, the cost is killing me.

Just because someone likes a product doesn't mean they are getting paid to sponsor it. If that's the case, Robert Hyatt must be worth billions because Crafty has been name dropped quite a bit for the last 10+ years. It seems I can't go a single live event on ICC or Playchess without someone asking what chess engine the host or guest use, and the response is almost always "I like to analyze on my own, so I don't care which engine, Crafty is good enough to blunder check". ChessBase happens to be, as far as I can tell, the first chess database that allowed you to play through games, organize games, search games, etc etc. At the time in the mid 80s, it must have been shocking. Because there was nothing quite like it, and all the GMs were using it, I'm not surprised at all that it quickly dominated. Is it the best? Well, I'm sure there are plenty of Chess Assistant users who would argue against that, but it's popular for a reason. If people prefer to pay a few hundreds dollars on software that does the same thing you like to accomplish with SCID, I don't see a reason to attack them. If you like SCID and it does everything you need, good for you. Just because some of us like ChessBase products, I don't see how that means we must be getting paid to do so.

[Milos]

Just because someone likes a product doesn't mean they are getting paid to sponsor it. If that's the case, Robert Hyatt must be worth billions because Crafty has been name dropped quite a bit for the last 10+ years. It seems I can't go a single live event on ICC or Playchess without someone asking what chess engine the host or guest use, and the response is almost always "I like to analyze on my own, so I don't care which engine, Crafty is good enough to blunder check".

That's just a ridiculous comparison. Crafty is free and open-source. Seams you don't even understand that.

ChessBase happens to be, as far as I can tell, the first chess database that allowed you to play through games, organize games, search games, etc etc. At the time in the mid 80s, it must have been shocking. Because there was nothing quite like it, and all the GMs were using it, I'm not surprised at all that it quickly dominated. Is it the best?

Ppl called in this thread prehistoric things that are 10 years old, and you are talking about 80s. OMG. It's 21st century already for 10 years, just wake up.

Oh man, I hope my check is in the mail because as much as I love ChessBase, the cost is killing me.
...
Well, I'm sure there are plenty of Chess Assistant users who would argue against that, but it's popular for a reason. If people prefer to pay a few hundreds dollars on software that does the same thing you like to accomplish with SCID, I don't see a reason to attack them. If you like SCID and it does everything you need, good for you. Just because some of us like ChessBase products, I don't see how that means we must be getting paid to do so.

I don't remember mentioning your name in the context of being paid from CB. Unless you think of yourself as Kramnik or whoever not from GMs. I don't understand why you fill threatened or attacked???

Is it maybe because you actually paid money for something that is worse than a free alternative and now feel like sucker??? So every time somebody mentions the product you paid so much as garbage you feel threatened?
That is definitely widespread phenomenon in this forum, especially concerning Rybka .

[tomgdrums]

Just because someone likes a product doesn't mean they are getting paid to sponsor it. If that's the case, Robert Hyatt must be worth billions because Crafty has been name dropped quite a bit for the last 10+ years. It seems I can't go a single live event on ICC or Playchess without someone asking what chess engine the host or guest use, and the response is almost always "I like to analyze on my own, so I don't care which engine, Crafty is good enough to blunder check".

That's just a ridiculous comparison. Crafty is free and open-source. Seams you don't even understand that.

ChessBase happens to be, as far as I can tell, the first chess database that allowed you to play through games, organize games, search games, etc etc. At the time in the mid 80s, it must have been shocking. Because there was nothing quite like it, and all the GMs were using it, I'm not surprised at all that it quickly dominated. Is it the best?

Ppl called in this thread prehistoric things that are 10 years old, and you are talking about 80s. OMG. It's 21st century already for 10 years, just wake up.

Oh man, I hope my check is in the mail because as much as I love ChessBase, the cost is killing me.
...
Well, I'm sure there are plenty of Chess Assistant users who would argue against that, but it's popular for a reason. If people prefer to pay a few hundreds dollars on software that does the same thing you like to accomplish with SCID, I don't see a reason to attack them. If you like SCID and it does everything you need, good for you. Just because some of us like ChessBase products, I don't see how that means we must be getting paid to do so.

I don't remember mentioning your name in the context of being paid from CB. Unless you think of yourself as Kramnik or whoever not from GMs. I don't understand why you fill threatened or attacked???

Is it maybe because you actually paid money for something that is worse than a free alternative and now feel like sucker??? So every time somebody mentions the product you paid so much as garbage you feel threatened?
That is definitely widespread phenomenon in this forum, especially concerning Rybka .

I still think that you are Glenn Beck in disguise. It is the only thing that explains your anger.

[OliverUwira]

I think they changed it to be like Acrobat Reader frankly. I never used it for anything except that anyhow, so it is a non-issue for me. You can always play around with it, and upgrade to premium if you like it. Personally, I thought it is a good alternative for someone who is not willing (or able) to get the full monty. I think it supports access to the online DB, which is a big CB feature, which also means access to it while on Playchess.

That's basically what it is. You need it in order to watch the their Chess DVDs. It's not really an evaluation version of the real thing.

I don't know much about other database software but if they rely on PGN it's clear why ChessBase is number one. The compression of their database format is about 1 to 10. Try processing something like the 5 million game MegaBase as PGN...

[Nimzovik]

Tom G. Wrote: I still think that you are Glenn Beck in disguise. It is the only thing that explains your anger.

Hey! Don't knock the Beckmeister! He's a GM of politics. Oooops. Wrong forum. Let's see....how can I make this official? Oh I got it! YAH! What he said! That last poster guy!

[bhandelman]

Just because someone likes a product doesn't mean they are getting paid to sponsor it. If that's the case, Robert Hyatt must be worth billions because Crafty has been name dropped quite a bit for the last 10+ years. It seems I can't go a single live event on ICC or Playchess without someone asking what chess engine the host or guest use, and the response is almost always "I like to analyze on my own, so I don't care which engine, Crafty is good enough to blunder check".

That's just a ridiculous comparison. Crafty is free and open-source. Seams you don't even understand that.

No, I do understand that, it was my point. Just because someone name drops a product, free or otherwise, does not mean they are sponsored or endorsed by the creator of that product, even if they are famous.

ChessBase happens to be, as far as I can tell, the first chess database that allowed you to play through games, organize games, search games, etc etc. At the time in the mid 80s, it must have been shocking. Because there was nothing quite like it, and all the GMs were using it, I'm not surprised at all that it quickly dominated. Is it the best?

Ppl called in this thread prehistoric things that are 10 years old, and you are talking about 80s. OMG. It's 21st century already for 10 years, just wake up.

There is a big difference between discussing the historical significance of software and actually using historical software. ChessBase 3 for DOS probably had a huge impact on the development of chess software, but I would never ever suggest someone use it as today and expect to be able to load up the latest ChessBase magazine with no problems. It sounds to me like you are arguing just for the sake of arguing, and I don't really understand why.

Oh man, I hope my check is in the mail because as much as I love ChessBase, the cost is killing me.
...
Well, I'm sure there are plenty of Chess Assistant users who would argue against that, but it's popular for a reason. If people prefer to pay a few hundreds dollars on software that does the same thing you like to accomplish with SCID, I don't see a reason to attack them. If you like SCID and it does everything you need, good for you. Just because some of us like ChessBase products, I don't see how that means we must be getting paid to do so.

I don't remember mentioning your name in the context of being paid from CB. Unless you think of yourself as Kramnik or whoever not from GMs. I don't understand why you fill threatened or attacked???

Is it maybe because you actually paid money for something that is worse than a free alternative and now feel like sucker??? So every time somebody mentions the product you paid so much as garbage you feel threatened?
That is definitely widespread phenomenon in this forum, especially concerning Rybka .

Well, I wouldn't say I feel threatened in anyway, I was pointing out the fallacy in your argument. You didn't mention any names, you just said people must be getting paid if they say nice things about ChessBase software in the forum and that it was the only reason someone like Anand would use it. You won't look at the larger issue I tried to point out that maybe Anand uses it because he has been using it for more than a decade and feels comfortable with the product. is Anand paying for ChessBase software? I highly doubt it, but that doesn't mean they are sponsoring him.

SCID is great for what it is, but you are the only person I have ever heard argue that it is the equal or better than ChessBase and Chess Assistant. I love free and open source software, some of it is absolutely unparalleled. Winboard in my eyes is every equal of the other Windows based ICS clients, and Crafty has obviously had a great impact as I pointed out. That doesn't mean I have some sycophantic view that because something is free or open source that means it is instantly just as capable or better than any closed source alternative. I am not an expert, but I am sure there are plenty of things people could point out to you that they use ChessBase or Chess Assistant for that SCID doesn't support. For me, one of the major problems is the interface, the rest of the functionality be damned. If the software I am using is difficult or cumbersome, and I have to spend half the time trying to figure out what I am doing, it isn't worth the effort. I would rather spend $200 than waste hours of my time trying to figure something like that out, it's a factor of time vs money. If you are happy with SCID, fantastic, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are "suckers" just because we pay for software. I would rather spend those hours improving my chess game rather than improving my ability to use a piece of software. However, maybe I am mistaken. Instead of ranting, can you point out any features SCID, chessdb, Jose, or ChessX have that make them superior to the paid alternatives? Perhaps some examples would go a lot farther to further your argument than calling the rest of us "suckers".

As for Rybka, I am not a fan and have never purchased or used a copy of it. The habit of the developer to make claims that other engines are clones, a very serious accusation, without any attempt to back up those claims leaves me feeling cold, so in the great spirit of capitalism I choose not to support his products. I currently use Fritz, Crafty, and HIARCS as my chess engines for analysis, and do not feel that Rybka would add anything to my current setup.