|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Leslie.
I appreciate your comments about WLD2. And I admit it is a complex
software that takes more then just a few days to learn the advantages
and obviously the disadvantages.
Let me ask you what exactly is it that you did/do not like about the
execution model?
Which version of WL did you use?
Regards.
Volker Knapp
Wealth-Lab Inc.
http://www.wealth-lab.de
http://www.wealth-lab.com
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Leslie Walko [mailto:l.walko@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Montag, 18. November 2002 02:39
An: sirtrade@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: Replacement for 2000i
I agree with Pierre. Could not have said it better myself.
I happen to own Wealth Lab.
(Ok, the price was low, so I tried it.) The core language
and the execution model are poorly thought out. Wealth Lab
produces slick graphics, I like the interface more than TS,
but, fundamentally, I do not make a living looking at pretty
pictures.
Easy Language is very well suited to examining time series
data. The language is compact, at times elegant, and
extensible. Wealth Script is convoluted, and verbose to the
point of distraction.
I also own MetaStock and developed systems in MetaStock for
several years. It is a closed platform. Simple things are
easy, but wait until you try to do something interesting! I
know more tricks about overcoming memory limits and
functionality limits in MetaStock than I'd care to
recollect. I asked so many complex questions from MetaStock
tech support, they would recognize my voice and
automatically transfer me to the most senior tech or
developer on call that day. All the same, many a times the
call would end with an apology that such and such could NOT
be done in MetaStock.
Other than Wealth Lab and MetaStock, I own about half dozen
other trading platforms. I do not use any of them now.
I do all my work in EL.
Should tell you something.
Regards,
Leslie
Pierre Orphelin wrote:
>
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : VK [mailto:vk@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Envoyé : dimanche 17 novembre 2002 19:15
> > Ŕ : 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
--
Regards,
Leslie Walko
610-688-2442
--
"Life is a tragedy for those who feel, a comedy for those
who think"
Horace Walpole, 4th earl of Orford, in a letter dated about
1770
|