|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
"As far as I know, GET is a black-box program and doesn't allow for any
users personal input(s)."
You are wrong, various tweaking of count and localization are allowed. I
don't believe in E-Waves. I do believe in the GET version of the counts.
GET is not a black-box. There are some proprietary indicators, but it is
flexible in user inputs.
Richard Estes
ICQ#402160
-----Original Message-----
From: A.J. Maas <anthmaas@xxxxxx>
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, October 16, 1998 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: ELWAVE
>Hello Bill,
>
>>Ton, Please share the fruits of your investigation. I speak as one who
has been burned in the past.
>
>Well join the "club". Me too and thats why I have also given more opions:
>apart from S&C and TAM, also like the ones from the of other 'worlwide'
users(known as testimonials)
>as can be seen on their website, knowing on forehand to also pin right
through these, eg anyone
>could have written them.
>
>>> >From reading S&C's John Sweeny's(Aug98) and TAM's Jan van
Gemeren's(Oct98)
>>> reviews and from doing experimental time on the working demo + from
watching the
>>> very 'fast' autodemo myself , I can say that I'm quite impressed. Enough
to futher
>>> continue on with these experimentals to get far 'deeper' into it.
>
>This ofcourse is no guarantee as to the program(s) to come up with the
right results, eg to do
>"the right" forecasts, outcomes or waves counts/displays.
>The program at least "in handling and oparating" is very slick and smooth
and comes with great
>help-files. This for me is a must with any program. Also the fact that its
not a "black box" program,
>a proper look under the bonnet(eg the Wave Inspector) is easy possible.
>As such, on me buying Metastock for the first time, this to me is also a
MUST.
>If a programs pre-set oparations are not giving me true or proper results,
or if they are to be
>bettered or if I just want to do my own thing, I want to have the
possibilities to be there:
>---- ready for me------- to make these and any of the right/other changes
and as such
>'set that program to my hands'.
>Both MS and ELWAVE give the user these required choices, eg custom or own
wave counts.
>
>>> For the moment have seen enough to put this program on the top of my
"next things
>>> to get list"(Last one was the recently bought Edwards & Magee book on
StockTrends,
>>> highly recommended by other Listers, i.e. recently pointed out by + also
thanks Steve K.).
>
>Considering the price of the standard first program, the Basic, this is
quite a different peace
>of cake in regards to GET and alikes, of wich, when disappointed, a mere
2,000 U$ is poured
>down the drain.
>As far as I know, GET is a black-box program and doesn't alow for any users
personal input(s).
>ELWAVE's Basic-EOD costs 245 U$, is user friendly, learns and gets along
easy, and alows
>for the by me personaly desparately required user inputs.
>This apart from the end results given in programs like GET, Winwaves etc.
>(I'm not knocking these programs down, as lots of others do get the by them
required properly
>'good' results).
>
>>> Here it will end up to be a Twin program along with co-TA-program
Metastock, in using it
>>> alongside one another as true complementory additionals, as each have
their own unique
>>> features / reasons for any of their usage and very important, sharing
the same MS database.
>
>Well see their info-files, the reviews, their help-files and above notes.
>All that for 245 U$ as starters.
>
>I recommend for anyone -upose to what I did: starting right out with their
working demo- to first
>to read S&C's review, then to read through the (one of their beautyfull)
Help-file(s) and then to
>run and lean back and to watch the very fast rolling Automatic demo.
>Lean back, use the spacebar to stop/continue the demo and let it all sink
in, eg relate from this
>distance to the program, eg as in how it functions, is build up, how it
calculates waves/targets
>and how these calculations can be checked upon(Wave Inspector), etc..
>
>Then start using the working demo, and like they said on their website "Get
into the feel of 4.1".
>As a beginner, I still have to adjust to the program, wich ofcourse is
quite natural, just 'only'
>smooth "beginners" operating in Metastock did take me 6 months to achieve.
>
>But I am very pleased in what I saw happening and also as how it was
displayed, of wich all of
>that can be set right to my own "standards" if & when nessecary(see above).
>Future program expansion, i.e. towards custom (formula) indicator building,
is also on its way.
>OLE linking is now possible, price forcasts are made, exit levels
determined, cycle modes are
>presented, R/R ratios given, extensive easy use Tutorials in program use
and waves counts,
>switch in true Elliot Waves or their own 10years of experiencing the waves
is included, etc etc.
>TOO, MOST of the above IS DONE AUTOMATICALLY..........................
>What more can I desire?
>I'll be by then finaly getting left up with the by me urgently required
more spare time, used before
>to do other usefull things, eg in relation to research, holidays etc.
>
>Metastock was suggested to me by EBAS, main TA software importers here in
the Netherlands.
>I went for MS, not for SC or WFW$, of wich were in the same price class,
mainly because of
>personal adjustments that when needed could be made at any time, easy and
smooth 'open'
>operating, high quality etc.
>As such consider ELWAVE in the same catagorie and on top to fullfill the
TA-parts(mainly
>Automatic forecasts and the Ewaves) that MS is lacking out on.
>
>Best regards,
>Ton Maas
>
>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>Van: Bill Saxon <bsaxon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Aan: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Datum: vrijdag 16 oktober 1998 3:44
>Onderwerp: Re: ELWAVE
>----------------------snip------------------------------------
>
>
|