|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : VK [mailto:vk@xxxxxxxxx]
> Envoyé : dimanche 17 novembre 2002 19:15
> À : tachyonv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Objet : AW: Replacement for 2000i
>
>
> People will use the software whose back testing capability is nearly
> unlimited and where they see the willingness to improve the software all
> the time.
Volker,
Rather than claiming that you are here to help, your message is truely a proof
of the usual underlying vampirism behaviour.
You are here to sell your software, usually by presenting it under a fallacious
superiority over TradeStation, and or so called help.
I may inderstand that you want to help customers to quit TradeStation, but this
is not the purpose of this list.
Let me say one thing: SERIOUSLY,if for any reason I was enforced to move from
TradeStation to an other platform ( I speak here as an USER and SYSTEM
DEVELOPER), Wealth Lab would not be the choice.
I have carefully visited the WL site and it's a good amateur work, but nothing
that compares with TS.
The langage is complicated, takes more lines to write the same in EL, has
cumbersome declaration statement and unwanted loops only to generate buy sell
signals.
Most of the functions are not disclosed. All of the TS functions are and here
is also the power of true debugging.
The design of the langage is the key of the software and actually none is
matching EL.
Most of the time the language used is a simple plug of a general purpose langage
like VB, Java, Delphi in your case.
I'm even not sure that it is a compiled language.
What the developers have not understood with EL is that a language has been
designed from scratch and adapted to one specific application: time series
analysis and trading system design. This is where the TS advantage is as well
with the on demand native database. Automated orders coming after that.
Easy langage is not a Pascal plug. It's a smart way to deal with maket data
with a clever database access, designed to work with the software.
Should WL developer have thought about this before starting to code ( plug),
this would have been different.
Weak choice at the begining, so you have to rewrite the language. Same case for
Metastock, a good charting program, but a nightmare programming langage ersatz
Lisp based that they carry like a punishment since the begining!
Adding so called features like portfolio optimisation to a weak platform cannot
be seen as an advandage.
If you really cannot see where the difference is in the language, you are not
really qualified to speak like you do.
For those who read ads without asking questions, I urge you to read their
technical support forum, then you will see where bell and whistles really are.
Wealth lab is again a good amateur work that was facilitated by the modern RAD
tools: Graphic libraries are now common and ready to plug, the general language
is ready to plug, then just add 100 or less trading fuctions and you have a so
called TS competitor ( that will lok like to the dumb user), badly designed for
sure, but available to any individual developer ( case apply to Wealth lab,
Esignal, Neo Ticker and the like).
Case DO NOT apply to Easy Language.
>
> As another consequence I think the business model of TS will start to
> vanish by end of next year. It is just a logical consequence, just think
> about it: What would you do?
>
This is where we can see that you do not understand anything to the problem,
where you only focus on some obvious TS limitations that you are not able to
solve.
Producing a TS competitor is a false problem ( badly addressed in your case).
Ease of use, stability and reputation is more important in such a small market
niche.
FYI, so called WL advantages are feasible with TS. For example, walk forward
optimisation that I use since 1993. Portfolio optimisation is feasible too,
using even some public domain tools, not to speak of the Rina things. So
excepted some nifty 3D graphics (also available with external tools), I cannot
see where the advantage is, but I'm still able to see where the numerous
glitches are and will remain because of the general design mistake that probably
only TS avoided.
> To make a long story short:
> I would not buy TS stocks. :)
Let me recall that you cannot buy Wealth lab stocks too...
Well, there are no WL stocks, even OTC ?
Would you turn the volume down now, it should be better.
Sincerely,
Pierre Orphelin
www.sirtrade.com
Tradestation 2000i, TradeStation 6 sales and support
Safir-X, neurofuzzy logic trading system builder ( no WL version)
To subscribe to our FREE trading system newsletter:
http://www.sirtrade.com/newsletter.htm
Next issue: November 2002
|