OpenChess

http://www.vitruviuschess.com/
I 'm awaiting to see people's comments and games, before buying...

noctiferus wrote:http://www.vitruviuschess.com/
I 'm awaiting to see people's comments and games, before buying...

Everything I've seen posted would indicate that it's the weakest of the Ippolits, and buggy in MultiPV mode.

That said, I don't think that the utility of an engine stands or falls with its strength, once it's "strong enough" (and Vitruvius appears to be as strong or stronger than R4, at least in some testing). If Vitruvius manages to suggest lines which make sense to human players, analyzing or preparing for games with other humans, and which differ from the typical "computer moves" without being blunders, that would be a useful achievement, even if it loses against Houdini.

But I'm skeptical, despite the couple of positions shown on the site (which need some confirmation and comparison with other engine output).

jb

Hi, Jeremy.
I asked the same question on Talkchess, and got an enthusiastic answer by Robert Flesher, one of the beta testers.
Are you speaking of the old free verion, or of this one?

I'd like to run an STS on it, but my main computer got a severe flu (a bad virus )

noctiferus wrote: I'd like to run an STS on it, but my main computer got a severe flu (a bad virus )

You should never run your computer as an administrator. Run as a restricted user and when you need to do administrative tasks such as installing software, you can hold shift, right-click, and then run as an administrator -- this will prevent, and/or limit the effect a virus, trojan, worm, malware can have on the system. Most viruses require elevated privileges to modify the system registry and system directories. Without access, the worst a virus could do is damage a single user account, rather than an entire operating system.

See:
https://www.microsoft.com/resources/doc ... x?mfr=true
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/libr ... 30864.aspx

If you need to perform administrative tasks, such as upgrading the operating system or configuring system parameters, then log off and log back on as an administrator.

Rarely is the above quote ever required.

Thx for the suggestions, but I entered as a user...

I guess it's time to reveal that I am an ex-beta tester of Vitruvius. I only used the early versions up to 0.83b, but I saw a remarkable loss of playing style with each new release, together with worse opening play and more "computer" like moves that goes against the spirit of the engine, choosing to better stick with 0.77.

When I complained about this I was told that it was like trying to use a short blanket to cover the head and the feet, and that it was impossible, so that the new problems introduced in new versions were to avoid many poor moves and losing plans in future positions for games. The problems were acknowledged (so, they weren't only in my imagination.)

At some point I stopped using Vitruvious for analysis of correspondence games as it never suggested any idea that was better than what I could get with other engines and its crazy tries were always very easy to refute (contrast with Zappa Mexico II Dissident Aggressor which now and then still suggests plans that blow the socks of Rybka 4.1 or Critter 1.4.)

While I have no idea if these problem persist on more mature versions, and I don't know if Vitruvius may be good or not for port-mortem analysis of human games, or OTB preparation (where needs compared to Corr games analysis are entirely different) I advice people to remain skeptical.

(This may sound like back-stabbing because I dislike it becoming a commercial engine, but I could have continued as beta tester and I'm just explaining the reasons I stopped are the same you'd want to not just buy the engine but first investigate if it's one that would be useful to you.)

Hi Uly,
The problem you highlighted was real. At some point in the development, I thought more to the performance, that the original idea of ​​Vitruvius... So I decided to "return to the origins". The commercial version of Vitruvius contains two versions: the "Human", very similar to the 0.79 version and the "Conservative" version, which is a bit 'more cautious and conservative. I would be very happy if you want to test these engines, let us be e-mail (or MP)...

best,
Roberto.

Sorry, but I don't like the way an engine by someone else was made commercial by a different author, it's as if I made my own Stockfish build and commercialized it, it goes against the spirit of the original source.

It would be a double standard on my part to critique the Houdini engine when it became commercial while supporting Vitruvius for doing the same, so in the same way that I would reject an invitation to beta test a future commercial version of Houdini, I have to decline your offer.

At some point I accepted the existence of the Ippolit derived engines, and how chess engine authors no longer had to build their engines from scratch, and instead, could just improve the Ippolit sources to gain attention and testers, but I still have problems when they go commercial and benefit from code that is mostly not theirs.

I have nothing against commercial software, I am a Rybka beta tester and have helped with the Chiron engine, but their code belongs to their authors unlike Ippolit derivatives.

On your last step, there is much to discuss ( very, very! ), but it is not my intention to enter into barren polemics. They are not useful for anyone. In any case I respect your position, it's coherent.

Best wishes,
Roberto.

carotino wrote:On your last step, there is much to discuss ( very, very! ), but it is not my intention to enter into barren polemics. They are not useful for anyone. In any case I respect your position, it's coherent.

Best wishes,
Roberto.

thanks for the fancy English!

polemics aside, my question:
are you actually 'selling' slightly changed ('tweaked' ) IvanHoe?


clearly that's what Vitruvus is...
or not?