|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
For some, data not in a chart might be as you say "the only data you do not
have", for some that might be tremendous amounts of data. Those using
workspace assistant to backtest on stocks for example, wanting several
thousands of data points for thousands of stocks will likely say it takes
some time to get those data over a line. For these, TS Pro is not for them.
Futures, well I do not know futures, those who can make it with only a few
months, then it works for them, for the others, TS Pro is not for them
There is no clean data, we have seen a number of mails on this, data with
wrong points, data split incorrectly, ... As long as the data is not
essential for you, it is ok, but when it is, it is better to be able to fix
it yourself.
On only way to be sure a new version works, I agree, you have to test it.
And that can be done in TS4 or TS2K by testring. In TS Pro you always risk
that you get it even if you do not want it.
Well, I see no problem discussing TS Pro for my own use without actually
testing it. It does not have the stocks I am trading, since it does not
deliver for my stock market. It does not allow me to backtest unless I chart
all of them. Why should I test if I like a program without data that does
not let me backtest the data I have in TS2K? The needs are different, with
what I lined up below, and above, there is no need to try the program since
it is so clear you can not do what you need to do.
With system writer, I would not have been certain without a test. With TS4 I
would not have been certain without a test. Without TS2K I would not have
been certain without a test. With TS Pro, it is so different and so limiting
if you do not fit the main stream, so if you are not in the main stream, you
do not need to test it to say is is useless for you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Yakhnes [mailto:gary@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: den 2 september 2001 19:38
> To: Bengtsson, Mats; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: NeoTicker (was Re: EL to VB translator)
>
>
> >From: "Bengtsson, Mats" <mats.bengtsson@xxxxxxxx>
> >The quality might be the same if you define it by stability, since
> >Omega has not tried to make TS2K very stable yet. Depending what you
> >want to do, it might differ a lot though. Let us try for example:
> >Backtesting on large sets of data (speed means data has to
> be on your hard
> >drive).
>
> The only data which you don't have on your hard drive is the
> data for the symbols you did not create a chart for. As soon
> as you create a chart for a symbol you have the data for this
> symbol on your hd. To confirm this you could go to off-line
> mode or close the program and reopen it in the off-line mode
> and see that the data is still on your hd and you could do
> any backtesting you do in TS2k. Also you have an option to
> set numbers of days data would be available on the hard drive
> for you (default is 60 days).
>
> >Running futures? (I do not, just heared it is not there).
>
> The futures are there for few months.
>
> >Being able to clean the data (which is a real time demand if
> you do not
> >want to be reminded on the spike the rest of the day).
>
> What if the data is pretty clean. Do you still need to clean
> it manually?
>
> >Knowing that if Omega makes an update, you do not use it
> until you are
> >sure it is better (will you get to do like that when they are done
> >converting users?) . . .
>
> The only way to be sure it is better or not is to test it for
> yourself or to collect other user's opinions.
>
> >Then, claiming TS Pro better than TS2K because it is more stable is
> >really falling into the lap of Omega and their ways of
> redefining the
> >truth.
>
> For me it would be really difficult to argue about something
> I never seen, just heard something, and part of what I heard
> turned out to be not exactly true... There are numbers of
> improvement in ts pro while some important features are still
> missing (we discussed this earlier). The overall
> performance/functionality score would heavily depend on the
> preferences and needs of each individual user (somebody would
> not use a product with no bad ticks editing option while
> other would prefer the comfort of auto-correction option for
> bad ticks as long as it works the way they expected).
>
> Thanks,
> gary
>
>
This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.
|