|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
At one time, when I developed software for a living and traded as a hobby,
this would have been an interesting project. As a full-time trader, I no
longer have the time or energy to devote several years to the development of
an open solution even though the goal is admirable. While I'm keeping my eye
on a number of futurewares, especially TradeLab/UMDS, I'll continue to
concentrate on improving my trading skills using whatever tools are
available now. If TradeLab/UMDS hit the streets tomorrow, I doubt that I
would be comfortable using it for my bread and butter day trading without a
good shakedown period. Ditto for most other software (new or upgrade, open
or closed) which hits the streets.
Earl
-----Original Message-----
From: David Shields <dshields@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sunday, November 08, 1998 5:40 PM
Subject: The Linux of Financial Trading Systems
>[posted to the list by request]
>
>Wow! We are getting some great responses via email and on the newsgroups.
>
>What most of us want out of this project is a tool for trading that will do
>almost everything we want, and -- since we will have access to the
source --
>can be made to do all those things we want to extend it to do in the
future.
>We want to implement our best trading concepts on our own terms, not wait
>years until some company like Omega Research decides to give us more power
>so we can trade on our best ideas. I believe Omega had the right idea way
>back when (and their success to date indicates so), but as a TradeStation
>user I know they aren't doing it for many of us anymore.
>
>While TradeStation has been the market leader, it has also been a
>frustrating tool to use. EasyLanguage really pisses me off because I would
>rather work in a real language without so many limitations. TradeStation
has
>also been frustrating because we've been stuck with a 16 bit Win 3.1
program
>for way too many years -- and now we've been waiting and waiting... and
>waiting for TS 5.0 (which has been delayed again, with the release moved
>into next year). Obviously, we'll get only what Omega says we can have and
>when they say they are ready to give it to us -- as long as we only have
>TradeStation to turn to.
>
>As traders, we want to control our destiny. That's why we feel so much
>frustration when Omega Research leaves us in the lurch. We trade for
profit,
>but it is more than profit. We like the freedom, the lifestyle, and the
>independence. We really do thrive on controlling our own destiny. That is
>why we, the community of computer literate technical traders, deserve to
>have the source code to our own open trading platform that lets us
implement
>our most creative trading strategies without limitation!
>
>This will really be a unique project among open software development
>projects. The Linux community is admirably altruistic. But here's what's so
>great about our project to build an open trading platform. We can do it
>altruistically and put the source out there for the benefit of all. We can
>do something great and feel good about what we've done for the welfare of
>our entire community. I have no doubt that the world will be a better place
>when we complete this project. However, we can take what we've created and
>use it to maximize our own trading profits. Talk about having your cake and
>eating it too! We could even create an elected board to trade various
>systems on our platform with donated money and use the proceeds to support
>causes we vote to support. Try doing that with an operating system!
>
>
>
>Here's a preliminary statement of purpose:
>
>We want to build a trading platform with capabilities similar to and
>eventually extending beyond TradeStation where the source is open and
freely
>available (but organized and maintained). The project will be in the spirit
>of Linux, but instead of building an operating system, we will be building
a
>trading platform.
>
>
>
>Some more rantings:
>
>Given Omega Research's arrogance in the arena of trading platforms it is
>easy to draw the comparison to MS in operating systems. But while Linux has
>a huge mountain to climb, and who knows how successful it will ultimately
>be, we can taste victory one by one as we successfully trade on the open
>platform we've created that lets us build, test, and implement trading
>systems without limitation. We don't necessarily need the world to write
>applications that run on our platform, although that can happen. As
traders,
>the best "applications" are the trading systems we build around our own
>style and personality. A trading platform can become a standard much more
>easily than an OS. And, of course, a trading platform can let us make our
>maximum profits even without any widespread adoption. What it all adds up
to
>is this: we have a project that can't fail.
>
>I know that this community can build a trading platform that will remove
the
>boundaries from our system building and technical trading. If you are like
>me, you know that the right tools will increase the profitability of your
>own trading and you are incredibly excited about getting those tools.
>TradeStation has certainly made a lot of people a lot of money from
trading.
>But many of us have wanted more, and for years and years Omega has not
>responded. No other vendor has given us the power we want either. We'll
take
>our destiny into our own hands with the power of a community building an
>open system. The Linux model will serve us well. Open source benefits
>everyone.
>
>Furthermore, we want to avoid the frustration felt when quirks (or bugs) in
>TS interfere with the trading strategy we want to pursue. I know many day
>traders are irritated by the unknown time stamp accuracy of the real time
>quote server. I know many technical traders who are frustrated by the
>arbitrary 13000 bar limit per chart. I know other traders who can't
>implement their best day trading systems because EL doesn't have the
>mathematical accuracy to support their algorithms. Personally, I hate the
>idea of building 16 bit DLLs to extend EasyLanguage when I can't even buy a
>good 16 bit compiler anymore. As good as it is, there are thousands of
>issues (problems) with TradeStation. Sure, there will be problems with the
>trading platform we build, but at least the community of users will have
the
>power to make improvements. With TradeStation the community of users is
>locked out -- only Omega Research controls the evolution of the product. I
>can't even get Developer Support at Omega to answer my email reliably, they
>don't take phone calls, and they don't call back in response to issues.
>EasyLanguage support for users is just as bad. If I had the source, I could
>support myself better. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
>
>Here's my own example of want I cannot do with TS. I trade options. I like
>mechanical trading systems. I would like to backtest option spread
>strategies just like I can backtest equity or futures trading systems.
>TradeStation won't do it. OptionStation is a joke. (I hear the new
>OptionStation 5.0 will feature EasyLanguage programming and system testing,
>which is exactly what I need... exactly, that is, if we could throw out the
>EasyLanguage and replace it with a real language, and if we had access to
>the source so I could overcome Omega's limitations and expand the features
>over time.) Well, you get the idea. Even the new version will be more of
the
>same old stuff. I want to start making money from my new approach to
>systematically tested option spread strategies as quickly as I can. In
other
>words, I want to control my own destiny, not be hamstrung by Omega.
>
>There's no reason to limit our conceptualization of this trading platform
to
>the TradeStation mold either. I reference TS merely because it is something
>familiar to most of us.
>
>
>Here are some preliminary thoughts on approaching the project:
>
>Let's organize the project like a business. It should probably be a
>non-profit organization. I like the idea of an organization because we want
>coordination and cooperation. We want efficiency of effort. We certainly
>don't want bureaucracy, and we don't want to waste our time in meetings.
But
>we want efficient coordination of our efforts. We want a virtual
>organization existing across the 'Net (like Linux).
>
>Once we get a firm commitment from, say, 20 qualified people we will form a
>legal entity that will control the source code and put it into the public
>domain (copyleft, or whatever appropriate method).
>
>We will elect a board to guide the project and help organize the efforts of
>all participants so that time and energy isn't wasted. The board will make
>policy decisions. However, since all contributors are independent, no
>decisions exert creative control over the participants and contributors.
>(There will be the usual restrictions against an individual taking the
>source and making a commercial application.) The result of this structure
is
>that any single contributor can have a significant impact on the project by
>contributing an insanely great idea. The main function of the board and the
>organization will be to hold the project together over time. The main
>function of the legal stuff will be to keep the source truly in the public
>domain and keep new contributions open for all to use.
>
>I volunteer to do whatever is required to get the project started.
>
>
|