Anti-MQL5 wishes - page 6
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Well, one should not interfere with the other. And then we see and discuss the terminal, but it is not the DC software, their tool is the trading server. Nothing prevents us from making the server part to please the DC, and the terminal part to "please" the traders, programmers. Autotrading is not only the future, but also the present, and not only for enthusiastic programmers, but for large hedge funds. And I think it is not so easy to promote the product on the market for serious brokerage companies, "real" brokerage companies mostly use their own software, customized directly for their needs, and their trust should also be "won", which is not so easy to do without popularization, gradual expansion of opportunities for all interested parties. All in good time.
All in good time. - Also yes, but for many this time has not come and will never come.
Timbo, now that you've explained in a little more detail what you want to do with CFD operations, it's pretty clear that your problems have nothing to do with the MT platform. Regarding everything you mentioned - I don't see any fundamental limitations that would make the operation parameters you want impossible. All your dissatisfaction is specific to particular DCs. And neither MetaTrader platform nor extension of functionality in MQL5 have anything to do with it.
Now for marketing: Marketing and software development are two completely different things. Moreover, advertising in Money magazine or on Yahoo's financial server is advertising that misses MT's target audience completely. The audience for the MT server is the organisations that provide their clients with the ability to transact in the financial markets over the internet. I would be very surprised if MT, as a platform, was advertised by MetaQuotes itself on the advertising platforms you mentioned. That would be a waste of money and a clear "D" to the marketing and sales department in all aspets. It's very strange that you're talking about competitors doing this. Are you sure you are talking about MT competitors and not DC competitors who use MT? The essence are two completely different categories.
A search on the same Money brings up not a single link to MT, not a review article, not the slightest mention. Not a single banner on any decent information site shows the level of these brokerage companies and also of MT. This level is below the plinth. That is what I am offended by. And even more offensive that I do not see a trend to improve the situation.
1. A total of 33, including some of the cited and the usual ones. ( some of them here )
2. Minilot 1.0, step 1 lot, why is it right 1 share??? in a lot 1 or 100, depends on the instrument...
3. I checked it with Online BROCKER, it was almost a pip.
4. Spread and commission, it is 0.09% for all the instruments
5. There is no requote as a class, it is executed on the market.
And I didn't ask about direct access and bid stack, because it would be a blow below the belt.
In short, things are bad enough with MT CFDs. On the other hand, I have no doubt that meta-quotes could bring MT up to world standards, but apparently there is no demand from their clients.
In terms of topic development I don't see any further development of this, CFD issue raised by me...
If you wish, you may continue in a separate CFD theme.
For I see this kind of instrument is not completely understood ... ;)
CFD is a contract for difference, for the price difference at the moment of opening and further closing.
However, a lot has been written about it, including the one on the TC website that has a banner above ...
1. Why and on what belief is it based that it should be a multiple of 1 share?
A lot is a lot, that minimum volume that you can trade... and if it's a multiple of 1 share of Sberbank
or 100 Gazprom, that's how it's traded on the stock exchange and I don't see any legitimate reason to split them,
which means the platform has nothing to do with it... :)))
2. Glass... Well, in principle it is possible for stocks, but I don't see much point in it,
what's missing is a real-volume transaction... :(
For CFD on futures I can hardly imagine the usability of this glass.
Unless you want to wash off another unsuccessful thread... ;)))
3) Regarding the number of instruments... it's kinda small...
Perhaps, but coupled with the rest of those that are in the link, and thrown out unnecessary
so much that I can't imagine the size of the depot to master them, even a million dollars is a drop in the ocean...
The other important feature of small quantity, is more detailed study of their habits.
There are three main sections from one account: currencies, futures and ru-shares
which in turn have at least three categories, i.e. we have nine trading directions.
Smaller and more reasonable portfolios for short-term speculations can be created on shares.
In general, it is enough for me personally... ;)
And I join in the "Wishes" that started this thread. May MQL be as glitchy and inconvenient. May it take at least two years to program a BUY or Shell function. Class bstone you say you have deep knowledge, I think KimIV is also experienced and rich, only I suggest you look here (https://forum.mql4.com/ru/10178) it took him 2 years to do it, while many will never get to that point. Is that the norm?
You just took his words too literally and put KimIV in vain. If he spent 2 years working 40 hours per week on this function, it's, sorry, a very weak indicator. I understand that it's not, and the phrase "2 years" implies somewhat differently, but then you can't use it in that context either.
I completely disagree with you. Look around you, at other systems that support autotrading. And then compare their capabilities with those that MT gives you. That's when you'll have a substantive conversation, and you'll see where the language is "DOS level" and where the high-level language is.
As for the rest, I'll stress once again that the expansion of MQL5, and in particular the introduction of classes, will not make things worse, but will only improve them. It's in MQL5 that advanced class libraries will become possible and programmers will develop them in order to raise semantics of MQL programs to a high application level. Those who do not understand this and oppose the development of the language in this direction are digging a deep hole for themselves.
Matkad is a specialized environment for mathematical calculations. Comparing it to a general-purpose programming language is rather ridiculous. The fact that MQL is actually quite close to a general-purpose language is, in my opinion, a significant advantage. And this is why, during the time of MT4 existence, a lot of scripts/indicators/experts have been created that go far beyond the functionality implied by the language. The developers should be thanked for this and not criticized and blamed. This is my opinion as a specialist in the sphere of software development. Of course, it will differ from the opinion of traders, but only due to their short-sightedness.
You cannot create a high-level application system with two BUY and SELL functions that will satisfy all traders' needs. It is nonsense. If you want to test an idea in a tester, it is done in MQL in a matter of minutes, even by a non-professional programmer. This is a big plus in MQL. If you want to turn your idea into MTS, which smoothly works 24x7 - ask professionals and they will do it for you, again due to the fact that MQL allows it, this is another plus.
There is always a line separating the flexibility and capability of a system from the simplicity of using it. Simplification leads to loss of functionality. If you do not like that it is difficult to open a position - use systems with two functions BUY and SELL. You want flexibility and a wide range of possibilities - use MT.
There is always a line separating the flexibility and capability of a system from its ease of use. Simplification leads to a loss of functionality. Don't like that it is difficult to open a position - use systems with two BUY and SELL functions. You want flexibility and a wide range of possibilities - use MT.
It's the "short-sighted" traders who pay the DTs, not the programmers. As a result, DTs without MTs can afford to advertise in Money magazine, and those with MTs - not.
By the way, you can check the idea on the history in the alternative product even faster than in MT, because the language allows you to use commands like buy(size) and not to bother.
It is free software. it is a low volume starter kit offered to all comers,
and therefore necessarily available to the user with a poor internet connection.
Hence the obvious limitation on the size of the MT distro, now crawling over 3 MB,
it's clear that the increase in size in this sector of free trading software is limited
to a certain limit of 5, maybe 10 meters. Otherwise we need to introduce an add-on in MT distribution,
Suppose a beginner will receive МТ in person, from managers of brokerage companies. And this, you will agree, is a different marketing.
Therefore addition of some properties and capacities, even descriptive, in MT-xx is connected with radical modification of
of the entire MT-4. But here is the problem of compatibility.
Hence my wishes against MQL-5 with classes - don't tear the helm onto itself,
Otherwise I'll get a flat corkscrew, and modify MQL-4 to the standard simple C in Kerrigan's notation.
Let's not forget the market sector in which MT-4 is positioned.
It's free software. It's a small starter kit, offered to all comers,
and therefore necessarily available to a user with a poor internet connection.
Hence the obvious limitation on the size of the MT distro, now crawling over 3 MB,
it's clear that the increase in size in this sector of free trading software is limited
to a certain limit of 5, maybe 10 meters. Otherwise we need to introduce an add-on in MT distribution,
Suppose a beginner will receive МТ in person, from managers of brokerage companies. And this, you will agree, is a different marketing.
Therefore addition of some properties and capacities, even descriptive, in MT-xx is connected with radical modification of
of the entire MT-4. But here is the problem of compatibility.
Hence my wishes against MQL-5 with classes - don't tear the helm onto itself,
Otherwise I'll get a flat corkscrew, and modify MQL-4 to the standard simple C in Kerrigan's notation.
As it is true, I also know only C from my youth as a programmer and even when classes appeared, I continued to follow the rules "write simpler" and "if it works - don't touch it" and insistently did not use classes. And no one prevented me from using them, including software - all I was required to do was not to include "attributes" of the object-oriented paradigm into my code.
What classes, what are you talking about!!!! Quite enough of what I have (in terms of software), namely 2 mb to "bet" with DC. :о) But seriously, in my line of work I implement expensive commercial systems. The cost of such systems (only license) for organizations can easily reach several million dollars (this is one of the expensive segments, but not the most :o), plus an average of 10-20 percent of these amounts for annual support. And do you really naively think that this commercial software (some single module with one license costing about 30 thousand dollars) doesn't have any bugs???? So just so you're aware - they're up to a dime a dozen in the literal sense.
So, MQ - develop, wait for quality transition and as an obvious consequence - waiting for an increase in errors, well, without this, unfortunately, does not happen. This is just as normal.
PS : There will be a separate site for MQL 5, and what about the old one, I wish I had not seen so many sites on one topic. Maybe a portal of some kind.
1) the possibility of trading exchange contracts and the cup
2) Aggressive advertising and promotion of MTs.
About (2) I can not say anything, not strong in marketing ... By the way, what is this magazine Money, can you give me a link?
And about (1) - it seems to me that it must be the main advantage of MT5 in comparison with MT4. Why else would we increase the version number? The developers are keeping silent like a partisan, they want to surprise everyone :)
Or just without any tricks a button "Increase the deposit 10 times"