|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Dans un courrier daté du 23/09/98 17:14:35 , Earl écrit :
<<
PO's unrelenting personal attacks on me for my factual criticisms of Omega's
poor product quality and poor support, brought the following private
inquiry. My reply follows.
>>
Relenting could be easily achieved by more careful posts to the List...
<<
No I have not TS in any form. I've owned SC2x through SC4. When I needed
real-time software, I would have upgraded to TS had it not been for Omega's
refusal to fix bugs and support the Omega product I already owned. Instead I
use Ensign Windows for real-time trading. I continue to use SC for my EOD
analysis including analysis of data ranging from 5 minute to monthly and
from early 1900's to current. I intend to switch everything (real-time and
EOD) to TradeLab when it is released
>>
This is a personal choice.
I really hope that TradeLab will be available soon.
It will be better for you , and the List will have some rest.
<<
I have some 30+ years experience in software development, I've had numerous
correspondence and phone conversations with Bill Cruz about serious bugs,
and I've performed beta testing for Omega so I didn't just crawl off the
boat.
>>
Having 30+ years of programming is a fact.
Writing nonsenses could be achieved even with 50 years or more.
<<
It is not widely known that SC and TS modules are pretty much identical
except for the real-time server and power editor. Thus, when bugs are
reported in either the SC or TS graphics, EL execution, and downloader
modules, the bugs are in both products.
>>
Certainly not.
The Power Editor allows things that are impossible to write in SC, not to
speak of realtime intraday systems that are not allowed in SC RT, and not in
SC EOD, even historical.
For example, multiple entries and exits.
More , any complictated code cannot be build in SC if you do not make use of
users functions.
However, users functions may behave differently than the same code written
directly in the systems (see the
simple vs series discussion in this list month and years ago).
How do you verify this with SC ?
You cannot!
<<
Further, with SC2x (which I kept
around even after upgrading to later versions) I had full use of the Power
Editor (crippled in later releases) and accumulated extensive experience in
writing a lot of heavy duty EL systems, functions and indicators. On
occasion I have written EL systems and sent them off for compilation with TS
Power Editor, and then compared results running under both SC and TS and
found them to be identical.
>>
SC has the ability to run TS code, and vice versa.
But you cannot experiment in SC a code like it was written inTS, as you are
unable with SC to perform the mandatory verifications that would allow you to
qualify to comment TS so called bugs.
You can do it only on examples that you can master in SC.
Only in SC...
Your SC2 example is invalid as you were maybe able to use the TS3 Power editor
using a third party software.
Crippled it is now, and FYI we are using TS4 build 21, TS 5 soon.
Not TS3, with a strange adaptation that make Omega react by crippling the SC4
Quick Editor
What do you want to compare with your old TS3 like SC2 ?
To prove that there are bugs in TS4 using a TS3 fake, maybe ?
Are you considering the readers of this lists as bozos (well, maybe hardly a
dozen, but for the others ?)
It seems that you are confusing between "necessary conditons" and "sufficient
conditions".
A trap in which most often students fall.
Not a 30+ year programming guy,or I'm missing something.
And even if all above was not true, you may know that a doubt will always
subsist in your assumption:
SC is not compiled in the same thime than TS is.
It may use some of its components.
Any serious software developer would not write the title of your message
because you are assuming that both oftware are the same because the seem to
behave the same on common examples.
If a bug was present in TS, you could not be able to find it if it passes the
SC test.
And the reverse.
Useless after that to criticize again Omega on how they beta test their TS5
software...
Regards,
-Pierre Orphelin
|