New castling rule for Windows Vista 🙂 This was sent in by Ken Tait. Click here to see the video. Perhaps Microsoft should hire a chess consultant to teach their programmers the basic chess rules?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
- About Us
- Chess Improvement
- Chess Puzzles
- Chess Research
- College Chess
- General News
- Home
- Major Tournaments
- News
- Polgar Events
- Privacy Policy
- Scholastic Chess
- SPICE / Webster
- Susan’s Personal Blog
- Track your order
- USA Chess
- Videos
- Women’s Chess
- Contact Us
- Daily News
- My Account
- Terms & Conditions
- Privacy Policy
Ouch! What a silly error.
even my Sargon III in DOS did it right.
Believe me, this is a joke from Microsoft.
Smile!
Maybe he was playing in some kind of testing mode? And, er, did he just take the black king?
Not only that, but White made three moves in a row skipping Black altogether!
Chess Titans was actually written by a separate company contracting with Microsoft.
There are a lot of good chess players (or chess programmers) here at Microsoft (I’m one). They should have let one of us write the program. =)
@Insomniac, are you the programmer of the chess engine Insomniac? If yes, then you indeed know what you are talking about and I am sure that the computer chess community would welcome your comeback!
While this is a real bug, I am irritated how many people posted videos of that program on YouTube, just because of an entirely correct en passant capture.
They thought the program has a bug because they didn’t know the en passant rule…
Perhaps Microsoft should hire a chess consultant to teach their programmers the basic chess rules?
Just a remark:
Today it is a heavy duty collectors item, the very first dedicated chess computer available to the public, the Chess Challenger I. On that chess computer, the numbers were on the horizontal line and the letters on the vertical. Thus, it was not e2-e4, but 5b-5d. One kind of wonders, how much chess did the designer of that machine knew 🙂
Well….I had a opportunity to test it. In the sequence of……
1. f3-e5
2. g4-
….it failed to find the potential Qh4++. Chess computers came a long way, didn’t they :)?
Yes gabor, you are right 🙂 Definately a long way behind us… but also, a long way to go?