|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Dear Group,
I had an eye-opening experience a year or so ago.
I live in the Seattle area, which, although it has Microsoft and two of the richest
people in the world, I would not call a "trading mecca." A year or so ago, I was in
one of the large downtown hotels one Saturday afternoon and happened to look at the
hotel's "What's Happening Today" board. Lo and behold, there was a "Learn to Trade
with TradeStation" all-day seminar put on by Omega Research. Out of curiosity, I
snuck in to what was a small ballroom filled with 150-200 ordinary-looking people
with their eyes glued on the overhead projector, listening to the Omega guys tell
them all about bring up charts, putting on indicators, and trading with
computer-driven systems.
That was one Saturday afternoon --- in a hotel room --- in Seattle. God only knows
how much they paid --- I know it wasn't free. Yet it drew 150-200 people (and it
wasn't even raining !!!) . If that one event drew 150-200 people (in Seattle, no
less!), what is the size of Omega's potential customer universe ... the universe
that they are designing their products for??? It's gotta be a whole lot larger than
150-200.
And how many people are there who are active traders and who remain in the game and
who use Omega products and who are savvy enough to see the benefit in what Bob and
Rod and Mark and ... are wanting? Maybe 100-200 total, possibly more, although I
doubt a whole lot more. (A year ago, I spent a week on and around the floors of the
two Chicago exchanges and didn't see one professional use TS --- is that telling or
what?).
Now if you were in the driver's seat at Omega, where would you aim your company? Who
would you give your attention? A few hundred active, experienced traders who already
own the product? (And want product improvements that a potential customer or novice
trader would likely not understand the need for?) Or the masses upon masses out
there who want to "follow their dream" and believe that they can buy a product that
can turn them into profitable traders? And isn't it true that the more bells and
whistles and fancy do-dads and add-ons, all of which which work automatically - "by
computer", will only lead to greater power, reliability, success, profitability,
etc.??? (Hence the "need" for the progression from TS 3.5 to TS 4.0 to TS 2000.)
I commend the Cruz brothers and their running of Omega. In my opinion, they are in
business to sell the most Omega products to the most people at the highest return.
What I see is that they have defined their market and are putting substantial energy
into meeting its needs as they perceive them. Unfortunately for us, I don't see us
as being the focus of that market. But that's the Cruz bros'. decision, and they get
to make it --- it's their company. Mark is now putting energy into creating an
alternative product, one that fills a different need as he sees it. That's his
decision and he gets to make it --- it's his company. I wish them all well.
Sincerely,
Richard
"J. Rodney Grisham" wrote:
> Bob Fulks wrote:
>
> <snip, snip>
>
> > It is quite clear that the development process at Omega is totally
> > out of control. SP3 makes major changes in functionality in what was
> > supposed to be a bug fix release.
> >
> > Any experienced software manager knows that you must freeze the
> > functionality of code long before the release and only allow bug
> > fixes after a version is released. This code is "pre-beta" quality.
> >
> > Under these conditions, it is not clear that we will ever see a usable version.
> >
> > Perhaps they will wise up and recompile TradeStation 4.0 as a 32 bit
> > application, eliminating only the 13000 bar limitation with no other
> > changes. That could be a decent product to retain their market
> > position while they fool around with redesigning TS2000i.
>
> As an ex-software product manager, I agree with this opinion 100%.
> In general I dislike reading "me too" messages which fail to add
> information, but Fulks' post is absolutely, positively correct, and
> it goes straight to the heart of the matter.
>
> If Omega were to wise up, perhaps they could do just a little more
> than eliminate the 13000 bar limitation, but not much more. Listen
> carefully, Omega.
>
> TS4 users on this omega-list could construct a prioritized list of
> not more than a half dozen bugs to be squashed at the same time a
> TS4-32 version was created. Omega could reduce that list based on
> a lack of localized code changes required to effect a fix for bugs
> on the short list.
>
> Surely the Omega development and QA troops could manage
> 1. 32 bit version,
> 2. elimination of the 13000 bar limit,
> 3. elimination of any Y2K bugs not already patched by build 24, and
> 4. a very short (<6) list of bug fixes, each with localized changes.
>
> Send your suggestions to this list, with a copy to Omega.
>
> Rod
|