Talk:ChessBase

Chess High‑importance

	Chess portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

NPOV

I've made a number of changes to give a more neutral point of view. The original was just too much like an advert for Chessbase, saying their software is dominent, their server is the dominent one in Europe etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkirkby (talk • contribs)

Now it reads more like an attack of the company for its commercialism, and offers editorials on the quality of the product. Are 8000 games too few? For what purpose? I used the trial version for two years with immense benefit to my chess playing. From my POV 8000 is not "too few" for all purposes.--JStripes 12:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've modified this section to render it more neutral.--JStripes 13:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My comment about why 8000 games/database is not particualry useful has been removed. Why is this? Surely the reason that 8000 games is not useful should be stated.

Whilst I appreciate this is not a review of chess software, taking this software in complete isolation, seems rather odd. If one reads the Linux page, it mentions Microsoft Windows, which is clearly similar software (an operating system). Read the Microsoft Windows page and mention is made of Linux - comparing security of Windows vs Linux.

Even the original promotional entry from Chessbase acklowledge the existance of scid, which is a free database that does most things chessbase does.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkirkby (talk • contribs)

OK, I've addressed these points. BlueValour 23:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SCID is no longer maintained, but has been replaced by ChessDB.--JStripes 12:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new version of Chessbase light out now that is based on the newer Chessbase 9. I believe that there is also a Spanish version of the website (not just German and English). (TimmyBx 20:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Criticism/Comparisons to others?

To balance the article it needs to have a criticism section as well as comparing it with other programs. Does chessbase endorse standards, does it have an update policy? Where are the updates for it's newer products on it's website? Why did Fritz play Kramnik when it's not the number 1 program in the world? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.213.119.163 (talk) 20:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It can hardly offer reasonable comparisons when there appears to be no mention of Chess Assistant elsewhere on Wikipedia.--JStripes 12:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Organization

The article needs better organization. Information about the playchess server is buried in a section on "the company", but the see also section is dominated by a list of other chess servers.--JStripes 12:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've reorganized it.--JStripes 13:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bookup

I did a search for the term "Bookup" and found nothing. Possibly I'm not well versed in searching Wikipedia. Anyway, ChessBase servesa market of about 110,000 chess players with their line of excellent products. Bookup serves a fraction of that (about 25,000) with its line. I would expect Wikipedia to at least mention it. Perhaps it should have its own wiki? I'd likely be pilloried if I edited it myself. :) MikeLeahyAtBookup (talk) 18:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot image

What's wrong with using the former screenshot (1024x740 pixels)? The current file version is so low resolution that it's just a blur. Urbanus Secundus (talk) 16:47, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]