MT4 doesn't have long to live - page 74

New comment
 

MetaDriver:

Because you won't be programming in Excel.

Wrong. I do 80% of my work time, and it is in Exxel on VBA. You can't even imagine how convenient it is to combine programming with formulas and spreadsheets and databases. I even have brunettes who use Excel to create access rights in the domain ;).

And trade... don't be lazy - try SierraCharts and CQG, it's easy to do via Excel

 
MetaDriver:

...is good for mental health - humility before reality builds up and gratitude for the work done by others.

Words of gold.

 
I don't use MT5, but I have this question about a single position. Let's say we are trading in MT4 and in the course of price movement we opened 10 orders with the same lot and at the same distance. A correction of 50% has occurred and the price is in the middle between the first and the last order. This means that the winnings have turned to zero. But if we have managed to set stops of orders to Breakeven, we will close half of the orders at 0, and half of the orders will remain and we are still in the money. To achieve this effect if we have a single position, we should partially close the position during a pullback. The position must have several stoplosses for that, but as I understood it, MT5 does not have it. We should place pending orders and pay additional spread when each of them triggers. Or am I wrong?
 
david2:
I don't use MT5, but I have a question about a single position. Let's say we are trading in MT4 and in the course of price movement we opened 10 orders with the same lot and at the same distance. A correction of 50% has occurred and the price is in the middle between the first and the last order. This means that the winnings have turned to zero. But if we have managed to set stops of orders to Breakeven, we will close half of the orders at 0, and half of the orders will remain and we are still in the money. To achieve this effect if we have a single position, we should partially close the position during a pullback. The position must have several stoplosses for that, but it does not exist in MT5, as I understood. We should place pending orders and pay additional spread when each of them triggers. Or am I wrong?


You are wrong. You will not have to pay additional spread.

 
Renat:

Words of gold.

That's not a bad thing either.
 
tara:


Wrong. You won't have to pay the extra spread.

Affirmative. A stop loss is just an ordinary pendulum. No worse or better. With the same closing conditions (slippage etc).
 
f.t.:
That's not a bad thing either.

What flattery?

There's a steady stream of such connoisseur evaluations that you can only humbly brush off your karma and work even harder.

 
Renat:

Words of gold.

Renat, I still can.

If I were you (MetaQuotes), I would implement CCA orders... And I would leave it up to the broker's discretion. If it wants to include it in its services, if it doesn't want to - it doesn't.

Even if we only make one CCA pair (Stop+Limit)...

1. the library of functions mapping MT4 order system to MT5 order-position system will be available in kodobase next week.

2. not a single argument even in the imaginary favour of MT4 vs MT5 will remain with the locals.

Let the broker decide whether to give CCA ... not to give CCA ... - Your business is to implement the functionality (and carefully warn the broker of the consequences), while brokers should worry about server overloads.

I personally don't need CCA so far, I don't have strategies without it. My benefit is indirect and it is in another way - the introduction of the platform will accelerate. And in this I am certain.

But your benefit to your business is direct. It does not matter whether you think the CCA orders are meaningless or not - there is a high demand for them. It is foolish to pass them by.

// It's not humble at all. Take my example. I look at all sorts of Andrews Forks and other Gunn Rakes, and I think: "What an idiot people are..."

// And then I realize: "Why am I...? Maybe there's something in that idiocy, even if I don't understand it at all..."

And you can assume that people have reason... even if they're glitchy. The main thing is that they are willing to pay for them. Real deposits for the spread.

So let them do it. As long as they don't complain about the platform... No one will force them to use CCA.

Hyper-responsibility (in your case, excessive concern for suckers) is also hubris. Think about that at your leisure.

You are trying (systematically!) to prevent opportunities for people to make mistakes. And people need mistakes. For learning. And they need a terminal where they can make them.

As for spamming the servers with unnecessary requests - it is NOT YOUR problem either. Warn the brokers about the possible consequences of turning on the CCA - and let them have a headache.

 
MetaDriver:

Even if you only make one CCA pair (Stop+Limit)...

It's no use. That clutter, which has already been created, back to a simple one will not return (it's not just about locos). Money has been poured into development. So that is the fate of 5...
 
OnGoing:
It's useless. We will not be able to return the clutter, that has already been created, back to a simple one(it is not only about the lots). Money has been poured into development. So that's probably the fate of 5...

What else is the point?

No one is forcing you to use any of the software features of MT5 (of which there are actually more).

You can write simple systems in MT4 style (correcting the syntax of trading operations and getting data from indicators). It is easy.

What else is there to do?

1...676869707172737475767778798081...83
New comment