Good on you to cite the image you used for this blog. Others do not cite, and I suspect if they are willing to claim images as their own, they may also claim moves from stockfish as their own.
chessbase? try chessbook instead (just a 3 letters difference :-)
good
@Falkentyne said in #2:
> I've been using chessbase ever since Chessbase for MS-DOS came out in 1992-1993 or something.
Chessbase actually has been available since at least 1990, because that's when I started using it (and I mean the MS-DOS version, not the Atari one which was published around 1987 or so).
> I've been using chessbase ever since Chessbase for MS-DOS came out in 1992-1993 or something.
Chessbase actually has been available since at least 1990, because that's when I started using it (and I mean the MS-DOS version, not the Atari one which was published around 1987 or so).
Jesus! 400EUR a pop. Is Chessbase plated in gold or something?
Chessbase is expensive but I haven't seen anything that comes close in terms of functionality. Even as an amateur I find it easier to organise material in a clear way in Chessbase. There are a bunch of free alternatives, but not is nearly as good it seems. As for extending lichess studies: there's so much that would have to be done that it would become a completely different thing.
Dboing, you should write a blog on ways SCID can address some shortcomings outlined in the OP.
Of course we prefer open source things.
Of course we prefer open source things.
I am not sure I can do that alone. I keep editing and editing and it does not help upon iterations all the time.
And I might not go the SCID way, if my self-resuscitation project of going back to R-programming to handle chess data from its bottom formats, or hook that to existing libraries, open source also, ends up taking reality..
I would not have the time to deal with an journey through SCID, I might end up ranting about assumptions from the chess world or traditions. I may be typing a lot, but I have my lazy sides, and limited resources. I appreciate the thought though. If blog could be shareable seamlessly in draft mode, it could become a slow pace project, which would have more chances of me catching my own flares in time before splashing in vain.
By shareable I mean not diffusion but more like inbox communication. or private studies small group, back and forth.. Now, one has to go through hoops, if even possible. Really not the lichess I discovered in 2019, on the collaboration aspect, beyond accepting to play a game, type of features. It could improve back to it. I don't know if blog is a lost cause in that direction, but I suggest it might try to repair that damage.
And I might not go the SCID way, if my self-resuscitation project of going back to R-programming to handle chess data from its bottom formats, or hook that to existing libraries, open source also, ends up taking reality..
I would not have the time to deal with an journey through SCID, I might end up ranting about assumptions from the chess world or traditions. I may be typing a lot, but I have my lazy sides, and limited resources. I appreciate the thought though. If blog could be shareable seamlessly in draft mode, it could become a slow pace project, which would have more chances of me catching my own flares in time before splashing in vain.
By shareable I mean not diffusion but more like inbox communication. or private studies small group, back and forth.. Now, one has to go through hoops, if even possible. Really not the lichess I discovered in 2019, on the collaboration aspect, beyond accepting to play a game, type of features. It could improve back to it. I don't know if blog is a lost cause in that direction, but I suggest it might try to repair that damage.
@schlawg Ideas for a title that might make it eventually suggested to those who do not know it would exist yet?
Is there a flair with title areola impact. Maybe some the 3 slot front page display algorithm is not minding left or right orientations for the author royalty title, or its programming is not. I guess it might be audience driven. I would have to high jack a blog comment section... I am not sure I would be able to not feel having overdone it some days later.. I do not have the confidence that expertise in the eyes of target audience might convey. I have only my ability to discuss, reason up front, share my conceptions as possible misconceptions up front, inviting good faith discussion. Is blog really something for me?
so ideas:
> SCID VS SCID VS PC, ...., What gives?
(should I put parsing parentheses?). A comparative journaled review into a possible rabbit hole trying to figure out the features I would need for my chess study projects, out of a software with traditional improver individual target audience.
Would that interest anyone? It would be biased and people might only glean my tangent glances at what I would bump into while searching for something else. This is not about Chess base vs SCID. I would expect the same problems with Chess base, on top of the usual secret mentality and proprietary everything which my kind of chess science is about everything efficient in sharing and reproducibility. Not the usual premise, even for those who accept chess theory as something valuable to consider.
I am a bit feeling lonely, I should say, if I were to take liche lobby news or offering for my readings as representative of the whole chess userbase on lichess. I thought this blog authors was not stuck in the cogs of chess business. But I guess some paths need to have some means of keeping afloat. And Chess base, is not going to fail in that audience being targeted.
Did the blog author, not help at all? We could do a project surveying all the unique differential feature offerings of any chess database software out there. Focusing on what they each have that others don't. It would have to be multilateral collaboration for efficient and minimizing the verbal inflation and industrial mind manipulation techniques, we call advertisement industry.
Is there a flair with title areola impact. Maybe some the 3 slot front page display algorithm is not minding left or right orientations for the author royalty title, or its programming is not. I guess it might be audience driven. I would have to high jack a blog comment section... I am not sure I would be able to not feel having overdone it some days later.. I do not have the confidence that expertise in the eyes of target audience might convey. I have only my ability to discuss, reason up front, share my conceptions as possible misconceptions up front, inviting good faith discussion. Is blog really something for me?
so ideas:
> SCID VS SCID VS PC, ...., What gives?
(should I put parsing parentheses?). A comparative journaled review into a possible rabbit hole trying to figure out the features I would need for my chess study projects, out of a software with traditional improver individual target audience.
Would that interest anyone? It would be biased and people might only glean my tangent glances at what I would bump into while searching for something else. This is not about Chess base vs SCID. I would expect the same problems with Chess base, on top of the usual secret mentality and proprietary everything which my kind of chess science is about everything efficient in sharing and reproducibility. Not the usual premise, even for those who accept chess theory as something valuable to consider.
I am a bit feeling lonely, I should say, if I were to take liche lobby news or offering for my readings as representative of the whole chess userbase on lichess. I thought this blog authors was not stuck in the cogs of chess business. But I guess some paths need to have some means of keeping afloat. And Chess base, is not going to fail in that audience being targeted.
Did the blog author, not help at all? We could do a project surveying all the unique differential feature offerings of any chess database software out there. Focusing on what they each have that others don't. It would have to be multilateral collaboration for efficient and minimizing the verbal inflation and industrial mind manipulation techniques, we call advertisement industry.
I would also be very interested in a new organization of the Lichess studies, allowing to classify them better.