|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
This proposal comes a little bit to late, I think. A new generation of trading
s/w will be released - TradeLab will be released in the next days, TradeStation
5.0 will come up in the next month's - and with the current trading s/w
available you can make a lot of money and don't have to worry about programming
such a complex project. If you are interested in trading, 1st of all concentrate
on trading than s/w development !
Best Regards
Frank
>
> -----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.
> >
> >
|