|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Sometime ago, I put BMI and e-signal next to each other as part of a test. I
found that while e-signal is about 5-7 seconds faster, BMI is far more
reliable. Over the past three years, BMI has gone down on me two times.
Internet service from various ISP's goes down on a regular basis including
lots of down time experienced with my DSL. How would you like to be in the
middle of an S&P trade and then see your internet service go down and you
don't know where market price is currently? Scary? You, bet. That's the risk
associated with internet feeds.
Even with Satellite dish service, your data provider, including DBC, will
tell you that it is subject to "rain-fade".
Yes, BMI costs more and is a few seconds slower but it unquestionably far
more reliable than internet service.
Best Regards,
John Theo
----- Original Message -----
From: <ManningSto@xxxxxxx>
To: <lwright@xxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: BMI vs eSignal; was-> Re: BMI Sat Question
> I was initially very reluctant to go to e-signal. I finally did and used
it
> side by side with BMI cable.
> I just cancelled the BMI cable and am quite happy with e-signal.
> In my opinion, the speed of e-signal is probably as good as it gets. The
> index prices are identical to the CNBC screen and are also identical to
the
> Bridge system I have.
> I don't know of any other way to really know. We all realize that every
data
> feed has some delay but I think e-signal is about as fast as any other. I
> could be wrong and would love to find out if I am.
>
>
> Manning
>
|