|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I don't think that deleting a couple of years from my data dates makes sense
(even if I could figure out how to do it). For example - when I test systems -
I look at more than the raw test results. I want to see where the buys/sells
are at various points in history. E.g., how did the system do before the 1987
crash - how did it perform in the bear market of 1973-74 - etc. I think I'd get
a little confused trying to remember that 1987 is now 1984 - and 1973 is now
1969 - etc. <g>.
I agree that SuperCharts is a better program than Metastock (at least it is for
my purposes) - but that won't help me if it doesn't run. FWIW - with regard to
Metastock - it will read a date like 1/1/00. But I suspect it's reading the
date as 1/1/1900. Not as good as reading the date properly - but better than
not being able to read the date at all.
As an aside - I have some large daily files (some going back to the 1920's) -
and SuperCharts can't swallow those files in a single gulp either (it needs 2
gulps). Now that I think of it - perhaps that's because I have my data stored
in Metastock format.
So - with all that data - what are your charts telling you now? Robyn
Richard Parsons wrote:
> Robyn, I'm afraid you are right. OMEGA obviously realised soon after
> releasing SuperCharts that it was too good. If you really want to go on
> using SC after Y2K you'll have to take a couple years of the dates in your
> data files. You should be able to do this in MSExcel.
>
> I use Metastock Downloader v.5.11 for EOD equity prices. I can't get either
> SC or Metastock to read a metastock data file with '00' for the year.
>
> Omega's advert, that a Shetland Pony compares to a Race Horse as Metastock
> compares to SuperCharts, is absolutely correct <g>. My daily data file of
> the Dow Jones Industrials from 1900 will not even load into Metastock (only
> 7000 lines of data), SuperCharts has no problem, except that it cannot read
> '00'.
>
> These software vendors must start telling us how to address the problem or
> is there anyone out there who can suggest a 'work around'. Else, a lot of
> good software is going to be useless.
>
> Richard Parsons
|