|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Osborn <jimo@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: jzaner@xxxxxxxxxxx <jzaner@xxxxxxxxxxx>; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
<omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, December 24, 1998 6:11 AM
Subject: Re: Viability of Internet RT feed
>"Profit95" <jzaner@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>I can tell you that the speed of reporting (CQG vs. Signal
>>internet) is virtually identical. I believe CQG to be the Rolls
>>Royce of vendors because of their clean data and reliability (of
>>course the price is out of sight) but we love the price and
>>portability of browser based quote systems--we will also be testing
>>several other internet source and would be pleased to report our
>>results if of value to the group.
>
>I'd be very interested to hear your results, Jack.
>
>When you mention "portability" does that mean they allow you to
>use your own browser, or do they give you an application (or tell
>you you need to use X)?
>
>Thanks for the info,
>
>Jim
Jim: At this point the portability only refers to being able to access
delayed quotes (plus studies) any where I happen to be. Real time, as you
know, is charged by site and thus would incur high additional expense away
from the "official" location as given to the various exchanges. By the way,
I have had Signal Online go down several times, in which case I restart the
website to select another server (they claim to have 32)--this seems to
correct the problem--of course by that time I have lost data. This rarely
happens with CQG (it being a dedicated land line.)
One very excellent feature of CQG is that they self correct bad time and
sales in real time. We've still got 2-3 more vendors to test. Until then,
Regards, Jack.
|