|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>Intresting
Carl,</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>Anyone other (positive?)
experience ?</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>Thx
Carl</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>Theo
Lockefeer.</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>From: Carl Kettler <<A
href="mailto:ckettler@xxxxxxxxxx";>ckettler@xxxxxxxxxx</A>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To: <<A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent: April 12, 2000 1:53 AM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject: Re: Brokers : Amertrade
expirience</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> I don't want to bash on third hand
information, but I had a very<BR>> interesting conversation last week with a
sales engineer for a network<BR>> hardware vendor who found Ameritrade was
basically throwing lots of<BR>> hardware at a software problem with their
network design, and at the<BR>> time (about a year ago) was unwilling to
acknowledge that they needed to<BR>> re architect the software they were
using.<BR>> <BR>> I am also a network engineer, and based on what I was
told, I personally<BR>> would not feel comfortable relying on their back end
system to execute<BR>> my trades. Unfortunately, this sort of design
information is not the<BR>> sort of information any trading firm would
normally publicize, so I<BR>> don't know how good any other firm's
infrastructure is either.<BR>> <BR>> "Theo E.M. Lockefeer" wrote:<BR>>
<BR>> > Thanks for the info Vitaly, Think Datek (sometimes also problems)
is<BR>> > perhaps better then Ameritrade( didnot experience the sort of
problems<BR>> > you had). Theo Lockefeer. ----- Original Message
-----From: Vitaly<BR>> > Larichev <<A
href="mailto:vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>>To: <<A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>>Sent:<BR>>
> April 10, 2000 2:28 AMSubject: Re: Brokers : Amertrade
expirience><BR>> > Theo,<BR>> > ><BR>> > > After
having Ameritrade's account for about 4 years, now I am<BR>> >
considering to close it. My<BR>> > > only, but big for me complaint is
that confirmations are very slow -<BR>> > typically more than<BR>> >
> 1 hour (the last time when I placed orders with Ameritrade was late<BR>>
> last year, cannot say<BR>> > > if there are recent improvements).
Although I am not a daytrader,<BR>> > yet it means in practice<BR>>
> > I cannot correct my order - for quite a while you don't have a<BR>>
> slightest idea if it was<BR>> > > executed at all and at what
price if it's at market.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > Cheers,
Vitaly<BR>> > ><BR>> > > P.S. Sorry, could not respond earlier
having problems with my ISP<BR>> > vs. Metastock List<BR>> > >
server.<BR>> > ><BR>> > ><BR>> <BR>>
</FONT></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Wed Apr 12 06:29:06 2000
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA23932
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 02:37:31 -0700
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id DAA14609
for metastock-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 03:00:19 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14606
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 03:00:16 -0600
Received: from web121.yahoomail.com (web121.yahoomail.com [205.180.60.129])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id DAA03044
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 03:12:00 -0600 (MDT)
Received: (qmail 22384 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Apr 2000 08:55:54 -0000
Message-ID: <20000412085554.22383.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from [64.38.26.232] by web121.yahoomail.com; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 01:55:54 PDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 01:55:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Burwell Pike <castlekeep52@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Continual charge for maintenance releases???
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
Here, Here......When you can charge your customer for
your errors, what incentive is there to strive for an
error free software? Metastock just doesn't get it,
not only is the customer their quality assurance, but
your force to pay them for rendering them your
service......Geez
--- "Theo E.M. Lockefeer" <sky40912@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Glen :
>
> I agree ! (with you).
>
> Theo Lockefeer.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Glen Wallace <gcwallace@xxxxxxxx>
> To: MetaStock listserver <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: MetaStock Support <support@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: April 11, 2000 6:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Continual charge for maintenance
> releases???
>
>
> > No, Lynn, that is not good enough.
> >
> > Although I think it is highly unprofessional to
> require your customers to pay
> > to fix your errors, my bigger concern is how you
> expect us to discover when a
> > maintenance release has been issued (Equis's
> participation on this list has
> > been inconsistent) and what the release fixes (you
> still haven't answered my
> > question about whether the maintenance release
> fixes the user resource leak in
> > MS Pro).
> >
> > Come on. For a US$1,500 software application, I
> expect you, Equis, to fix
> > your errors promptly and get the maintenance
> release to me at *your* expense.
> >
> > Anybody disagree?
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Equis Support" <support@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 8:06 AM
> > Subject: RE: Continual charge for maintenance
> releases???
> >
> > > List,
> > >
> > > In the past, the patches that we posted on the
> web site caused much more
> > > headache to customers than it was worth. Many
> people were either installing
> > > the wrong patch or multiple patches when they
> only needed to run one of
> > > them, or there were people that had multiple
> installations of the program
> > > and the patches sometimes failed to update the
> program in the location that
> > > they expected, etc.
> > > Installing the maintenance release from a CD
> will eliminate most of these
> > > issues.Therefore it was decided that there will
> not be a patch posted on the
> > > web site for versions 7.0x. The update will be
> via CD only.
> > > The $9.00 charge for the 7.0x release includes
> the cost of the CD,
> > > duplication and shipping anywhere in the world.
> The cost will be determined
> > > at the time of the release depending on if it is
> only a maintenance release
> > > or if there are any enhancements to the
> software. If you have any further
> > > questions on the upgrade cost, please contact
> our sales department at
> > > 800-882-3030 or 801-265-8886.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Lynn
> > > Equis Support
> > > <http://www.equis.com/>
> > > <http://www.equis.com/customer/support/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christian Baude
> [mailto:BAUDECB@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2000 7:54 PM
> > > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: Continual charge for maintenance
> releases???
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 19:55:01 -0500, you wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have just ordered the 7.01 maintenance
> release for MS Pro and was
> > > > charged $9.00. Now do I have to pay again for
> release 7.02 and on
> > > > and on and.....or will these fixes be posted
> to your website. I don't
> > > > think we should have to keep paying everytime
> Equis fixes an issue
> > > > in their software. Thanks for your reply.
> > >
> > > Interesting question.
> > >
> > > I just got the full EOD upgrade on a CD as v
> 7.02, I ASSYOUME the
> > > patch from 7.xx to 7.02 was on the WEB.... I
> just checked, and they
> > > are still on the 6.52 time frame.
> > >
> > > Equis is just too busy at this time upgrading
> their followers, and
> > > making sure everyone is please.
> > >
> > > Equis, I'm sure, being a good and socially
> responsive software
> > > company, will release the patch to fix minor
> unforeseen issues with
> > > customer's configuration, will be posted on the
> WEB site in due time.
> > > <g>
> > >
> > > -÷ Chris ß ÷-
> >
> >
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com
|