Scid vs. PC 4.14

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Andre
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:40 am

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by Andre »

Hello... My request would be to make SCID vs. Mac true Retina display ready.
Today, pieces and squares are a bit fuzzy on retina screens.
Btw, how to you dock the different menus like in the Mac screenshot? Couldn't find it in the options.
Thanks for all your hard work Steve
stevenaaus
Posts: 608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:44 am
Location: Australia

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by stevenaaus »

Jesse Gersenson wrote:Thanks for your continued work on Scid vs PC. Here are two bits of feedback.

1) On linux I set a tournament to run 5 rounds, 15 seconds per game
Ok - you have in fact set the time to be 0 seconds per game + 15 second increment, which it doesnt like. To play your time controls enter ".25 minutes 0 seconds"

The problem is the interface, and i have changed to be a bit more obvious. Base and Incr are now both in seconds.

Re Retina - Tk-Cocoa is getting a little better nowadays. Who knows, maybe one day it will work properly, and support Retina, but i doubt it. :?:
User avatar
Ozymandias
Posts: 1532
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:30 am

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by Ozymandias »

Andre wrote:Btw, how to you dock the different menus like in the Mac screenshot? Couldn't find it in the options.
It's not an option, but rather an odd behavior of the OS X menu bar; by NOT pressing F11, it remains fixed to the top of the screen, obscuring the Board pane name, or others at that height. I hope they don't fix that, because I actually don't like the pane names showing at all :wink:
Jesse Gersenson
Posts: 593
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:43 am

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by Jesse Gersenson »

Image
stevenaaus
Posts: 608
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:44 am
Location: Australia

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by stevenaaus »

OK. I don't know what version that is, but it's not 4.14. Probably worthwhile upgrading.
Jesse Gersenson
Posts: 593
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:43 am

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by Jesse Gersenson »

It is 4.14. That's an edited picture showing a possible layout for 'time per game' and 'increment per move'. i.e. Put them on separate lines.
JohnW
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 12:20 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by JohnW »

Sorry if this has been asked a million times, but what exactly does "Scid vs. PC" mean?
Dann Corbit
Posts: 12537
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by Dann Corbit »

JohnW wrote:Sorry if this has been asked a million times, but what exactly does "Scid vs. PC" mean?
Scid stands for Shane's Chess Information Database.
User avatar
reflectionofpower
Posts: 1607
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:28 pm
Location: USA

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by reflectionofpower »

They used to support Linux but no more.
"Without change, something sleeps inside us, and seldom awakens. The sleeper must awaken." (Dune - 1984)

Lonnie
User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 2:40 am
Full name:   

Re: Scid vs. PC 4.14

Post by Eelco de Groot »

reflectionofpower wrote:They used to support Linux but no more.
I don't think that's true? I don't have Linux but as far as I know SCID is at least as multi platform as Stockfish. On the installation page they first mention Linux and FreeBSD. I do seem to remember most new features or fixes first were available for the Linux users but that probably was just because you have to compile the sources yourself for Linux so you need a C++ compiler but that is built in Linux right? Everything should still work also on OS X.

As far as the name is concerned, I also did not know exactly where it came from, Steven writes here
Scid vs. PC began with bug-fixes for the computer-versus-player features of Scid (hence the name), but has evolved into a solid alternative with many new features and interfaces. The project is authored by Stevenaaus and numerous contributors
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan