MT4 doesn't have long to live - page 28
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
It is also very important to have an economic approach pumped into practice.
What you have written is a terrible misunderstanding of the financial realities of this world.
Both on.
It turns out we have a deliberate retention of Pinocchios on the field of wonders. It must be recognised that MQK5 is an excellent tool that solves this problem.
A bad attitude, you have to admit. Making users look like incomprehensible watermelons and a secretive 'for the benefit of millions' policy with words, but in reality cutting options so that people lose money. Fortunately, the fact that it's wrong has been proven wrong. It's worth looking at Nokia, which has a third of the market - a market not for watermelons, but for people who know what they need. It's worth looking at Chinese unlocked i-phones - they're much more popular. Most users reject the policies that have been mentioned, especially the experienced ones, whose growth is a trend now in the world of electronic gadgets, and among traders even more so.
It is important to understand what a particular company is aiming for.
Apple is not maximising the number of users, it is maximising its profits.
It is also very important to have an economic approach, leveraged in practice.
What you wrote is a terrible misunderstanding of the financial realities of this world.
Renat, I have already written to you: time flies, hundreds of car models change, but the Niva is still being sold in many countries, apparently in spite of your pimped-up approach. Just think - why? It has outperformed everyone else in terms of economic return on investment. Apparently your approach is wrong since reality proves otherwise.
It is important to understand what a particular company is aiming for.
Apple does not maximise the number of users, it maximises its profits.
Professionals use what is convenient. Right now, MT4 and MT5 are one of the best and most polished trading APIs out there. That said, MT4 API is enormously polished and has a huge advantage over MT5 API - reliable implementation of virtual orders. But it also has one limitation - lack of asynchrony. The FIX API is pretty much rubbish compared to the MT4 and MT5 APIs. A competent and reliable trading API is a strength of MT4 (in practice) and MT5 (in theory). There are other competent API's out there, to remain objective.
But for a professional, using MT4 and MT5 comes down to just using them as a trading API. The testers are out of their depth to use them on a professional level.This not only applies to the limited functionality (including hard history and trading environment), but also to the accuracy issues of testing. So I have to write my own calculators and use MT4 only as a trading API.
But then again, is it worth changing anything for the sake of a small bunch of dissatisfied (dissatisfied that it could have been done much better), albeit experts in their field? You're going by Apple's business scheme. Time has shown that it is super profitable for the company. What time will show next, we will see.
Renat, I have already written to you: time flies, hundreds of car models change, but the Niva is still being sold in many countries, apparently in spite of your pimped-up approach. Just think - why? It has outperformed everyone else in terms of economic return. Apparently your approach is wrong since reality proves otherwise.
That's not good at all.
To state as an example of economic efficiency the brainchild of AvtoVAZ, which was "built by all the USSR", then humiliated by deficit, then went through a stage of rampant theft and banditry (just for AvtoVAZ), then fed with steroids to support "domestic producer".
This is not to mention the example of Chinese stolen products where nothing has been invested in either development or design. One of these Chinese companies managed to steal 100% of MT4 design, but it was so clumsy that it is scary to even look at, let alone use.
Professionals use what is convenient. Right now the MT4 and MT5 APIs are among the best and most polished trading APIs out there. That said, MT4 API is enormously polished and has a huge advantage over MT5 API - reliable implementation of virtual orders. But it also has the limitation of lacking asynchrony. The FIX API is pretty much rubbish compared to the MT4 and MT5 APIs. A competent and reliable trading API is a strength of MT4 (in practice) and MT5 (in theory). There are other competent API's out there, if you want to be objective.
Stop hinting at the unreliability of MT5 trading. Give a clear evidence of the execution problem, please. But without rolling into lochs.
This is a hard programmer's proof with description of conditions, calculations, logs and reports.
But for a professional, using MT4 and MT5 comes down to just using them as a trading API. The testers are out of the question to use them on a professional level.This not only applies to the limited functionality (including hard history and trading environment), but also to the accuracy issues of testing. So we have to write our own calculators and use MT4 only as a trading API.
Please prove the assertion about inaccuracy of MT5 tester. Of course, again - a stark proof to make everyone shudder at the smallest detail.
I'm sure we'll have a lot of fun.
I think we have to wait a little longer and instead of a categorical no, there will be an announcement with offline charts
SZS: I remember when I was explaining to Rosh the necessity of passing parameters to constructor class in MT5, not even half a year has passed, everything appeared, no matter how hard the developers tried to prove that users are clueless in commercial products, but nevertheless, the current software competition always wins over the majority of users' wishes ;)
It has been bought - that's the point, for a long time and many places, for longer than others and the big names and without significant rework. This is the criterion of a good product, created not for watermelons. Watermelon creatures cannot boast of this - their lifespan is short, and manufacturers need to invent the bicycle again and spend money to create it.
Let's wish AvtoVAZ didn't bend and keep selling the classic NIVA.
According to the research, Nokia sold 107.6 million mobile devices during the quarter and its market share decreased by 5.5% compared to the same period last year. As previously reported, it was overtaken for the first time by US-based Apple in terms of revenue in the same market during the same period.
http://digit.ru/business/20110519/382103344.html
I want to, as the years of experience of dominance are far more valuable than a timid attempt at overtaking.
Let's wish Avtovaz would not bend and keep selling the classic NIVA.
It's not about Avtovaz - the market says the model is good.
Apple's shares started falling in value during the launch of the new iPhone 4S phone.
The device has already been called "the disappointment of the year" .....
During presentation - super, who wants to be Apple?