|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I have Metastock, AIQ, Amibroker and quite a few other TA and testing
tools - each of which I use for their own particular strength. I have
considerable experience in commercial systems and software development so
this may colour my view somewhat but IMO Amibroker is already *by far and
away* the best designed and most competent all round TA tool - it also has
the best technical support and an excellent user group.
MS has good charting and allows quick "visual" testing of ideas but for
trading system development and testing it is useless IMO. MS has been a
product going nowhere for a good while now and I see no evidence this is
going to change.
AIQ has some convenient data organisation and analysis features but weak
system testing and restrictive/quirky EDS rule-based formula language make
it unsuitable for developing anything other than fairly simple systems.
Once Amibroker charting is enhanced (scheduled later this year) I anticipate
being able to use it as my sole TA program. To any frustrated MS users out
there I would say get Amibroker now - you will not be disappointed. There is
a bit more to learn but this should be expected as it offers has far more
capabilities than MS. The syntax of the Amibroker formula language is very
similar to the MS formula language so the programming transition is quite
straightforward.
John
(No association with Amibroker other than very satisfied user).
----- Original Message -----
From: "CS" <csaxe@xxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: Power Basic programming-metastock
> Same here.
> Frankly, I wish MS would simply fix the bugs that have been noted a year
> ago. When bugs are found in AmiBroker they are fixed in about 72 hours
which
> are easily downloaded and patched from a web site. Try that in MS.
> It would be nice to stay with MS since I had bought into the program at
6.5
> and spent so much time developing indicators and systems, but my desire to
> evolve into dynamic/adaptive systems meant that I need to move on. If
pretty
> charts and basic indicators is your limit, stay with MS. I waited long
> enough and it was time to take the training wheels off. You'd be surprised
> how many familiar names decided the same thing.
> Do expect to exert more effort into programming because it does more. And
> because it does more, there are more possibilities.
> And no, I don't get commission, own the company, sell for the company, or
> date the owner's daughter, either.
>
> -Corey
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Owen Davies" <owen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 12:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Power Basic programming-metastock
>
>
> > > Do you work for amibroke or you on commission
> >
> > In view of the above accusation toward another guy who,
> > so far as I can tell, was only trying to help, maybe I'd better
> > point out that I don't work for AmiBroker, either. Nor am
> > I on commission.
> >
> > AmiBroker is a one-man operation. The programmer/pro-
> > prietor/guru is a guy named Tomasz Janeczko, who appears
> > to work about three times harder and five times more
> > productively than the entire staff at Equis. (And don't
> > get me started about those goniffs in Miami!) So far as
> > I know, the only marketing is from the AmiBroker Web
> > site and by word of mouth from satisfied customers.
> >
> > I haven't heard of any dissatisfied ones, but perhaps they
> > just quietly go away.
> >
> > If the program has a flaw, it's that it requires more
> > programming skill, and consequently clearer thought
> > about what you are trying to accomplish, than the
> > competing products. In return, it does most of what you
> > want; accepts add-ins in jscript, vbscript, and other
> > languages for the things it can't do on its own; and doesn't
> > lie to you about the results of your system tests.
> >
> > I'm finding that its learning curve is steeper than with
> > Metastock and SuperCharts, but also that the rewards
> > are enough greater to justify the effort. And then some.
> >
> > Owen Davies
> >
>
|