|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
"Is it really worth the time
money and aggrivation when so many alternatives are on
the cusp."
This is a tuff one to decide. I find the chromacode feature in TS2K very
useful. I find I can code and debug things about 25% faster than I can with
the monochrome EL editor in TS4 which makes me want to use TS5. That's one
advant. Still your point is very well taken. The overall performance of
TS5 may be slower because it tries to do more, more than what current
machines are really capable of doing. Was this the right move to make?
Speed makes sense to trades, slowness doesn't but then comprehensiveness
(power) does too. What causes TS5 to appear to be slower? It appears to
use MFC and MFC isn't as slow as TS5 is (ie drawing new charts, etc).
Implementing a server that can support an unlimited number of symbols I
think has a lot to do with it. When you've got a program not only trying to
update a RT display as well as record RT for 25000, 50000, even 75000+ files
(symbols) that's a lot of overhead -- a lot of overhead that can slow down
the system's response time. Don't forget that it's updating long complex
systems (probably interpreting the code on the fly with EACH NEW TICK that
arrives) and redrawing them RT along with updating orders and message logs.
It does this for each chart displayed (each chart loaded?). It does A TON
of stuff but all the trader sees is a slower system. One could make the
argument that the TS5 vision is just ahead of it's time. It needs a faster
machine than the ones currently available. Don't despair, the 1 Ghz
processors are only a few years off.
But really can you blame Omega? I'm sure the features they implemented were
the features most requested by TS4 users. They just listened to their
customers and who can blame them for that? It could be that the features
most requested are features that can't be fully appreciated on today's
machines.
Even though Tradestation has been on the market for 7+ years, there's not a
package out there that can do what it does. This should tell you something
about the complexity of it. If it was truly a $300 piece of software, there
would be a lot more imitators.
B.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Courchene [mailto:positionsize1@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 12:21 PM
> To: List Omega
> Subject: Re: Prosuite 2000i problems
>
>
> Win NT may be the OS of choice to run PS2000i
> but I have run it on both NT sp3 and sp4 and win 98
> with a BMI feed.
> Its a bit more stable on NT but I still had 1/3 of
> the data ticks missing from PS2k using BMI
> data(compared to TS4.0b21).no soloutions offered by
> Omega.
> NONE! Its like the problem doesnt' exist as far as
> Omega goes. I KNOW better.
>
>
> IMO PS2K is not a useful enough program (especially
> since the y2k patch for 4.0 works) to justify the
> price of the software, a dedicated Dual PIII
> computer,a ton of ram and an expensive buggy overrated
> OS that wont even allow you to run on ONE Large HD
> partition.
>
> Think about it folks. Is it really worth the time
> money and aggrivation when so many alternatives are on
> the cusp. ie;Traderware or Tradelab or Ensine or just
> your old TS 4.0 with B23 y2k patch.(unless you only
> have strictly an internet data feed as your only RT
> data source and need you TS systems indicators etc..on
> you I-net feed )
>
> You dont need TS2K to make money in the markets!
>
> Alan
>
> --- "phoon@xxxxxxx" <phoon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Guys,
> > >
> > > Win 98 is not a good choice for ts2000. You WILL
> > screw around till your hair
> > > falls out, or you die from frustration, with both
> > win 98 or 95. Bite the
> > > freaking bullett and get with NT homey, because
> > ts2000 is one of those apps
> > > that needs the bulletproof nature of NT.>
>
>
|