Improvements in program - Excalibur Phantom Force vs Alex.

[Monsieur Plastique]

Hi Steve,

It is interesting that there are variations between the unit I received and the ones that were being sold when it came out in 2007.

Cosmetically, my unit does not have those brushed aluminium florishes on the sides that you see on older units. Also, the "aluminium" surround on the front panel of mine is actually a silver adhesive decal made to look like brushed aluminium. The body of the machine is sort of rubberised plastic, so I don't think that is any different to your unit.

On the bottom of my unit, however, it is denoted as an "EBExcalibur" unit as opposed to Excalibur. The owner's manual is also dated 2010.

It is possible there have been changes to the design that may have been in the pursuit of economy, as the price is not as high as it was back in 2007, even though these are relatively new production units. Prior to buying the unit I read a lot of reviews at Amazon. I can't say I was not warned about the dreaded motor error messages (so I wasn't just relying on your own experience), but I had thought people just weren't using the units correctly or it was the typical syndrome where only people who have had trouble complain and that most of the happy users don't post reviews.

I would have gone with the 2Robot to be honest, but Cameron and I tested one several weeks ago and confirmed it is the same program as Star Opal (so too weak a program for me to play against as a serious opponent).

I opened my Phantom after it failed (afterall, I couldn't make it any worse). The motor that controls the motion of the magnet along the files was really hot, whereas the motor for the ranks was relatively cool. I also noticed the shaft of the "rank" motor did not turn nearly as freely as the shaft on the "file" motor, but I could not see any particular reason for this - everything was very well lubricated and the mechanism (apart from the motor itself) did not seem to have any significant "snags" in it.

[Fernando]

There you have Chinese made artifacts. You never know if they were done under strict supervision of the customer and in a real industrial facility or inside a village by the natives living there.
I have had problems even with pencils and shoes, but not, thanks God, with chess computers.
Here in my country several -a dozen perhaps- Chinese automobile brands has arrived and I am afraid they are even more badly made than Russian cars we also had years ago, now staying not in the streets but in backyards as settlement for rats and pigeons.

Went are the days of old good USA and European manufacture regards.
Fern

[Steve B]

Hi Steve,

It is interesting that there are variations between the unit I received and the ones that were being sold when it came out in 2007.

That is interesting
as a "First Responder" when it came to new chess computers
i would usually buy them ..when they were first released for sale
so i rarely ever followed any changes/revisons like the ones you mentioned
of course no one is making any new chess computers any more anyway

come to think of it...i also have a PF with the Sharper Image Badge
picked that up a few years after the PF's release
i wonder if it is the early PF or the later one you describe?

Hmmmm Regards
Steve

[Monsieur Plastique]

There you have Chinese made artifacts. You never know if they were done under strict supervision of the customer and in a real industrial facility or inside a village by the natives living there.
I have had problems even with pencils and shoes, but not, thanks God, with chess computers.
Here in my country several -a dozen perhaps- Chinese automobile brands has arrived and I am afraid they are even more badly made than Russian cars we also had years ago, now staying not in the streets but in backyards as settlement for rats and pigeons.

Went are the days of old good USA and European manufacture regards.
Fern

Well the way I see it with Chinese made chess computers these days is this: If you could go to the factory, pick 10 units fresh off the production line and give each one the equivalent of two full days continuous use via automated testing, then you would be able to pick the few out that are probably going to be in there for the long haul. But I don't think you would be picking that many out - especially if it is the Phantom production line.

After my first Phantom failed, I have been checking out another brand new replacement unit. This one appears to thus far have a fully functional mechanism, but the LCD display has problems - it is that same Excalibur issue we have seen in earlier models - whole segments of the display are missing, making it next to useless to use for anything other than very short, casual games.

I contacted the store to tell them that after getting two units that have both failed, I don't want another unit and would just prefer a refund (they have thankfully obliged). Chances are too high that I will just get another dodgy unit and that is bad for both of us. Although the shop claims to test them before they ship them out (and I am sure they do - I have no reason to doubt them), that is only going to weed out units that are effectively dead on arrival. Both my units worked perfectly for between 4 and 6 hours. It was after this time they both exhibited the issues I described.

Far be it from me to tell shops how to do business, but given the reviews the Phantom has gotton on Amazon, I would be setting a brand new machine on autoplay at the slowest time control overnight. I would then come in the next morning and set it to play another autoplay session at 40 moves in 30 minutes. If the machines pass these tests, chances of them failing when the customer gets them are dramatically reduced (though still quite possible). I realise this is time consuming but it is not nearly as bad as a customer getting two faulty units - the latter situation is equally bad for the customer and the shop. So I think shops need to consider whether they even sell a product like this. They either sell it and do a full overnight test or perhaps it is better just to refrain from selling them altogether (or at least to customers where the freight and return freight costs eat up the total cost of the unit to begin with).

I think the Phantom is going to end like the Novag Robots and Phantoms of the past. Working units into the distant future are going to be as rare as hen's teeth. I would be perfectly happy to buy 3 of these units if I knew each unit wasn't going to blow up after a day use. But it is too expensive to go buying them, having them fail and then dealing with the consequences.

Maybe they can ship me 10 units, I'll weed out the duds , keep the rest, and send the duds back at my expense! I would actually be happy to do that!

Incidentally, I think I spoke too soon about resolved bugs. I have now seen the exact same bugs in Phantom that I saw in DTTC and Alexandra. It is just that because they are seemingly random, they may not be easy to pick up on after only a couple of days testing.

[Fernando]

It looks like is better to ask a comp made by this German guy at very high cost but with a quality product. That is cheaper than buying one cheap bad unit after the other.

Cheap is expensive regards
Fern

[Monsieur Plastique]

Hi Fern,

Since you seem to have recently had your Excalibur Ivan II handy, would you mind doing a couple of quick tests for me please? These tests will confirm (or not) if your machine has had the serious bugs fixed.

The first tests to see if the machine permits illegal castling. So please input the following sequence of moves for both players:

1. e4 e5
2. Bc4 Bc5
3. Nf3 Nf6
4 Ke2 Ng8
5 Ke1 Nf6

Now go back into the standard player versus computer mode and try to perform a kingside castling. See if it let's you do it or not please.


2. The second test is to check for a stalemate bug. Have the machine play the following book sequence:

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. d3 Be7
5. c3 0-0
6. Bb3 d6
7. Nbd2 Na5
8. Bc2 c5
9. 0-0

These moves must come from the actual openings book itself, so you need to play against it as white until it makes the correct moves (this should not take too long as the book is not terribly wide).

If the bug still exists, then the machine will declare a stalemate on it's 9th move as black.

[Fernando]

As soon as I get some extra time I will do that.
Fern

[Steve B]

I received my brand spanking new Excalibur Phantom yesterday

I had 6 hours of wonderful fun with it

4 hours into an "autoplay" game it blew up with that wonderful aroma of burnt electronics. It appears at least one motor has failed, if not both

Well wadda know

YADPF
http://www.ebay.com/itm/The-Sharper-Ima ... 1205373839

Yet Another Defective Phantom Force Regards
Steve

[Monsieur Plastique]

Not forgetting the negative feedback that eBay seller Camelot Sales received recently, when a purchaser complained that their Phantom Force did not work.

For anyone even remotely interested in these things, the statement in this eBay auction: "...I heard it can be an easy fix by purchasing a similar motor at Radio Shack..." is nonsense.

The motor assemblies are fully bespoke, with complex plastic moulding encapsulation that you are never going to find in a million years at a generic electronics store. And even if you did (which you won't), the chances of you being able to successfully disassemble the existing mechanism and put the new motor in are pretty slim. I'd rather strip and re-build a Ferrari motor than repair one of these things.

Also, mind the copious quantities of glue they use to install the motors at the factory. But that is nothing a chisel, hammer and a bit of grind won't fix.

Phantoms were obviously built using the splattergun manufacturing philosophy. Throw enough of 'em through the factory gates and some of 'em have to end up working...for more than a week.

[Fernando]

Not forgetting the negative feedback that eBay seller Camelot Sales received recently, when a purchaser complained that their Phantom Force did not work.

For anyone even remotely interested in these things, the statement in this eBay auction: "...I heard it can be an easy fix by purchasing a similar motor at Radio Shack..." is nonsense.

The motor assemblies are fully bespoke, with complex plastic moulding encapsulation that you are never going to find in a million years at a generic electronics store. And even if you did (which you won't), the chances of you being able to successfully disassemble the existing mechanism and put the new motor in are pretty slim. I'd rather strip and re-build a Ferrari motor than repair one of these things.

Also, mind the copious quantities of glue they use to install the motors at the factory. But that is nothing a chisel, hammer and a bit of grind won't fix.

Phantoms were obviously built using the splattergun manufacturing philosophy. Throw enough of 'em through the factory gates and some of 'em have to end up working...for more than a week.

I insist. You cannot purchase anything made in China capable of giving you some trust. And as everything is today made in Cuina, I stuck to older machines made...in China.

catch 22 regards
Fern

[Monsieur Plastique]

Well there is China and China. Take the Mephisto Maestro handheld for example. Possibly the best build quality - internally and externally - of any chess computer ever built. Possibly even eclipsing (or equalling) the German-built Mephistos.

I think you still get what you pay for - even from China. It is just that some companies seem to want to save every possible cent at the manufacturing stage and then protect themselves from such a poor business decisions by offering a pathetic warranty.

But this back fired in terms of the Phantom because it seems that many never even make it to the 90 day mark. Neither of mine made it past the first week.

The only Phantom worth owning is a Rolls Royce. And that is not built in China (yet).