|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Glen:
Equis strengths are in good documentation and prior to V6.0, very good
technical support.
Equis' weaknesses are a poor file structure and data handling and an
unwilllingness to do a complete update on their program.
The reasons that I do not use Omega products: are poor documentation, and
poor technical support. Thier manuals read like they were written by
programmers or semi-literates. Like too many software shops they dont
understand the importance of having good techwriters do the documentation
and to bring them in at the beginning of the project. No insult meant to
programmers its just the nature of things, good writeres are ususally
people who write for a living.
Lionel
-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Wallace <gcwallace@xxxxxxxx>
To: MetaStock listserver <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: Was thinking of Metastock but now not so sure
>RS:
>
>I have not looked at Omega's TradeStation 2000i in depth, but I do monitor
>their listserver. I don't want to sound like a testimonial for MetaStock,
>but the bitterness expressed on the Omega listserver relating to upgrades,
>pricing, technical support and the complexity of Omega EasyLanguage leaves
>me with a healthy respect for MetaStock and the techs at Equis [is my free
>Equis T-Shirt in the mail, yet, guys? :) ].
>
>I guess the more you ask of a technical analysis package, the bigger it
>bloats and the more complex and buggy it gets.
>
>Subscribe to both listservers and get a feel for it before deciding on a
>package.
>
>
>>>SNIP<<
>>OK I decided to watch for a few weeks before jumping in.
>>Now, i think i will not. I dont know why anyone would accept
>installing
>>your own patches and all this file management and screen saving... and
>>not being able to write formulas the way you might want to with a
>programming
>>language or some "Easier" language.
>>
>>Has anyone thoroughly checked out Tradestation2000 ? I did read the
>>older T/S book with examples and the language looks EASY-er to me.
>>RS
>>
>
>
>
>
|