I would be sad if I came home after a long endgame fight to find out that I was slightly better and only drew.
That exact thing almost made me give up playing chess. You feel played the game of your life, and when you analyse as soon as you get home, the engine tears you to shreds.
That's why it's good to wait a week or two....
IMO a score of +- .5 in a club game is basically dead even, and I wouldn't call a move that changed the score by .7 a blunder at all. In any case, it's common for club games to experience swings in the score of 2 or more points just because of all the missed combinations. You still have to beat your opponent though, and if your plan was better than his, that's great, that's what it's all about. Comparing your play to a chess engine that plays at 3000 level isn't going to be helpful.
BTW an engine score of zero doesn't mean drawn, just that both sides have equal chances. For example, Crafty 23.3 scores the position below as 0.01, but I doubt it would end in a draw.
Engines are notoriously bad at spotting wins in endgames.
I would be very suspicious of an engine's evaluation of endgames. Post the position so we can have a look at it!
He still beat the other player, and even if he didn't play the perfect move, that's still something to be proud of if his opponant didn't make any mistakes more glaring than his own.
BTW an engine score of zero doesn't mean drawn, just that both sides have equal chances. For example, Crafty 23.3 scores the position below as 0.01, but I doubt it would end in a draw.
I just played this game in chessmaster and let chessmaster think for a while
and chessmaster has a genius way of getting a draw. 4 pawns appear to be winning but the rook gets behind the pawns.
if you doubt it try setting the position up against a computer and try to get a win. let it think for a 5 minut per move.
If it's a tactical draw like a perpetual then the engine is right.
Otherwise, be skeptical of the evaluation. It's moves can be strong, but not always best, but an exact evaluation in an endgame isn't something I wouldn't want to quote from an engine, they're just not tuned for it.
For example, a -0.69 may be rubbish, it may have been a technical draw 10 moves ago... but computers don't know technique, they just look at every possible move and have a relatively short horizon for this sort of thing.
Also it's funny your friend argued with you after he asked you to dump the game into a computer. Yeah it can be annoying, but if you want to improve you need to be open to the idea that all your games have inaccuracies (and probably some blunders heh). So if he wanted the computer to print him out a gold star, he's dreaming.
On the other hand if he wanted to improve, better to take a few hours a day and analyse the game himself first. In that case, at the very least, instead of obstinately stating his play was perfect, he would have variations to check.
BTW an engine score of zero doesn't mean drawn, just that both sides have equal chances. For example, Crafty 23.3 scores the position below as 0.01, but I doubt it would end in a draw.
I just played this game in chessmaster and let chessmaster think for a while
and chessmaster has a genius way of getting a draw. 4 pawns appear to be winning but the rook gets behind the pawns.
if you doubt it try setting the position up against a computer and try to get a win. let it think for a 5 minut per move.
That's interesting that Chessmaster drew that position. It had to sac the rook for the last pawn? Another question, does Chessmaster have the Nalimov tablebases? If it has the tablebases, wouldn't an engine's endgame analysis be pretty much perfect?
The start position is a position that's almost equal but usually doesn't end in a draw. Unless of course you're Iron Tigran! 
Also, IM Shankland has some good videos on this site about using computers to analyze games.
Example of a common computer engine failure-
Queen and passed pawn vs Bishop and Rook with a couple pawns on each on h,g,f files. An engine will give the Queen and pawn a 3.00 eval not recognizing the risk of a fortress position. The way to make progress in this position is to create a second weakness on the otherside of the board. This is outside an engine's horizon so any move to exchange pawns on h.g.f will cause the eval to drop drastically although in reality it is the only way to win.
I recently had an 80 mover on ICCF where my opponent didnt understand this until his machine told him mate in 21.. haha.
Again, show us the position!
I'll post the position later right now I am busy and tomorrow I have to play against him in a otb tournament.
I have a debate with one from my club.
He asked me to analyze a game with chessmaster which he won against a highly skilled player so he was proud which I understand.
he was especially proud of his endgame.
but I think he made 3 blunders in the endgame. 3 times in the endgame he made a move that made his score go from -0.69 advantage to a dead draw 0.0 12 move deep.
I am not a very good endgame player myself but I think in these situations the computer analysis is very helpful.
I think you have figure out why a move is maintaining pressure while the other move draws.
but he doesn't agree he says he played a good endgame and refers to the opponent high rating/skill and says "nobody can keep playing the best move"
but the other player did not exploit the fact that the game could have been a draw.
I would be sad if I came home after a long endgame fight to find out that I was slightly better and only drew.