|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Robert,
Been daytrading since 1995, started with TS 3.x, lived through the nightmare
of 4.x, now living through the nightmare of 2000i. If I were dependent upon
using *ONLY* Omega products, I'd feel panic. Fortunately, I also have other
tools which I use to trade (as well as TS). I suspect this is also true for
others on this list.
Like many others, I traded as a "hobby" until I was profitable enough to
trade for a living (which I do now, trading more than my own account). I
realize you could not have known this, since you don't know me and never
asked...
There is rarely a legitimate and productive reason for crudeness, rudeness,
or childish tantrums amongst professionals. If there's a real legitimate
problem (with ANY product or vendor), pursue it through proper channels...
including legal ones if appropriate. But whailing and moaning about one's
self-inflicted injury serves only to draw attention to oneself, and not to
the issue.
Last I checked, no one is required to purchase Omega products, and I have
yet to read about anyone that is dissatisfied with Omega products that has
not received their money back (or an extension of their
money-back-guarantee) when requested.
Do I depend upon TS2000i to make a living? Are you kidding? I do partially
depend on TS40, but could live without it if needed. Diversification is
good in trading tools as well as in the market :-)
Trade well, Robert...
Doug
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert W Cummings [mailto:robert.cummings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>
> Dick and Doug you both should just ignore "Mark Brown" and buy TSi. Then
> when the bugs start costing you real money you both can write your nice
> polite letters to Omega. When you compliant falls on deaf ears and if
> trading is your living not a hobby lets see how polite you are then.
>
> Robert
>
>
>
>
> At 03:59 PM 4/21/1999 -0700, Doug Forman wrote:
> >Thanks for making several excellent points, Dick. I think your
> thoughts are
> >lucid and well stated. I agree...
> >
> >Having followed this list quietly for a couple years, I recall
> Mark making
> >several meaningful posts to this list in the past. Unfortunately, I
> >eventually found it necessary to implement a "Mark Brown" filter
> on incoming
> >email so I would not be continuously exposed to the vulgarity and general
> >unhappiness he expresses. Others have indicated to me that they
> have done
> >likewise.
> >
> >Mark, if you're listening, be aware that the style of your messages is
> >probably damaging the credibility of their content.
> >
> >Dick, thanks again for saying what I was thinking!
> >
> >Doug
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Dick Smith [mailto:Dick@xxxxxxxxxx]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 5:18 PM
> >> To: Mark Brown; Omega List; Chris Baker
> >> Subject: Re: Omega Record Revenues And 51% Increase In Income
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Mark;
> >>
> >> Though I certainly am no lawyer, I'm would never be willing to take the
> >> liability risks associated with setting up a web site (or
> >> publishing in any
> >> way) comments adverse to Omega Research's products, regardless
> how good or
> >> bad they may be. Worse still is the hostile, inflammatory
> language that
> >> appears in these e-mails and on the web site coupled with threats
> >> like words
> >> to the effect that he is nowhere near through citing all the
> bugs in the
> >> Omega Research applications.
> >>
> >> If you hope to see any bugs that may exist in 2000i or
> whatever of their
> >> applications corrected. That is NOT the way to go about it.
> It IS a good
> >> way to wind up sitting at the defense table in civil action which Omega
> >> Research is probably better situated to pursue financially than the
> >> defendant.
> >>
> >> If you want to get the problems resolved, the best way to go
> >> about it is to
> >> clearly identify the problems in writing WITHOUT ANY hostile,
> heated, or
> >> inflammatory language. Just basically explain what happens or
> >> what's wrong
> >> with the program and what ill effect or hardship that causes you. Of
> >> course, you should respectfully urge the addressee to have the
> problem or
> >> problems repaired at the earliest possible moment. And, very
> important, I
> >> cannot express strongly enough the need to address such
> correspondence to
> >> the President or Chief Executive Officer, whoever that may be
> BY NAME. If
> >> you don't know the name, FIND OUT. It's as easy to do as a
> >> simple phone to
> >> the research desk of your local library. Find out their name AND THEIR
> >> mailing address (which are often different from the company's
> offices and
> >> plants. If you elect to fax your correspondence, it's worth a
> >> call to their
> >> office beforehand to get that person's individual fax number.
> >> Faxes of this
> >> nature sent to the main fax number may never see the CEO's desk or even
> >> his/her waste basket.
> >>
> >> I am not trying to delude you into believing that your
> correspondence will
> >> actually reach the CEO. But, if properly sent and
> respectfully worded, it
> >> WILL fall into the hands of a CEO's assistant or a VP who can and most
> >> likely will deal with the problem, hopefully in a way that benefits
> >> everyone.
> >>
> >> As for the bugs web site? I'd delete that in a New York minute.
> >>
> >>
> >> With kindest regards,
> >>
> >> Dick Smith
> >> Dick@xxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Mark Brown <markbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: Omega List <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>; Chris Baker
> <chrisbak@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 12:13 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Omega Record Revenues And 51% Increase In Income
> >>
> >>
> >> > well I just emailed this company BancBoston info@xxxxxxxx
> >> and told them
> >> > about the Bug Report 2000 web site that has been placed in
> every search
> >> > engine on the internet.
> >> >
> >> > I also told them that they didn't know jack about Omega and its
> >> customers
> >> or
> >> > they would have down graded it.
> >> >
> >> > mb
> >> >
> >> > World Famous Bug Report 2000 >
> >http://www.markbrown.com/BugReport2000.htm
> >>
> >>
> >> > Today BancBoston anlayst Jon Ekoniak (Robertson Stephens)
> upgraded Omega
> >> Research to a long-term attractive rating, from market perform.
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps Robertson Stephens should be made aware of TS 2000's being
> >> released with numerous problems, and Omega's ongoing refusal
> to admit to
> >any
> >> bugs in TS 2000.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
|