Hi, time for the outcome... I shall split the data across several posts, for an easyer reading.
Let's start with a first graph displaying the skills domains of the slow Mephisto IIIS Glasgow, the one set with CPU waits (7.2 Mhz equivalent):
The peak strength is strategy, a usually weak domain for oldies, but known to have a large impact (with tactics) on the overall strength. That is a much uncommon feature, revealing deeply thought chess software!
Opening management is strong, then middlegame and endgame loose some strength, a usual trend with our chess computers. Level of play is very weak in standard endgame positions (lack of theoretical knowledge), and the program is rather blind or reluctant to sacrifices. Tactics and calculation ability are limited, whilst threats recognition and defense are fine.
The overall KT score is 1374, to be taken with a grain of salt: the test has not been designed nor standardized for chess computers (nevertheless, some kind of standardization can be applied, I shall do my best in a later post). So, let's compare profiles to a 1374 Elo player:
Playing level is roughly on par with regards to tactical skills (tactics, recognizing threats, attack, counterattack and defense), and as well about calculations ability, middlegame and endgame. This provides a very human-like distribution of skills, highlighted by the better strategy management. The lack of endgame theory (standard positions) is the most obvious weakness compared to the human player.