What's new in MetaTrader 4 and MQL4 - big changes on the way - page 58
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
When 7 appeared, I also tested everything by myself. When I saw that the system was stable and even intelligent in many places, I forgot about XP to the detriment of speed.
yes it is faster on ancient computers, all the windows fly with the speed of light. no time to think. with 7 this starts with a certain computer power.
But as my computers (and laptop) have all been upgraded to modern level for a long time, it's stupid and unreasonable to use 7.
XP is there. it rules, it's faster. But 7 is supported by M$ and software is written to run on it.
my home computers have been used all versions of the software, from 3.11 onwards.
I have been on all my home computers since 3.11, so purely from personal experience I can say that the most stable versions are Youn95 and Youn7. all the others entirely depend on the crookedness of your hands. it was not from idleness that I installed Acronis on XP. after the third system reinstallation I got really tired of reinstalling. Of course, there are guys who have stable operation even with xryu. respect to them. but as for xryu, such units. and regarding sevens, i know many pure users, by the level of computer skills, pure lamers. but they simply do not need it. but who do such things with their sevens ... I installed systems for all of them and after installing them I saved the images just in case. i never had to use them. i just cleaned and fixed them up... I've had 7 since it first appeared. still have them, but there are some remarks. that's why, purely for the sake of even greater stability I turned my attention to 8 and if my hopes come true, I won't hesitate for a second to upgrade.
And as for the rarities - they're only appreciated at a rarity show. For XP users, listen to yourselves. one needs to enable something to the system to see the memory, the second made a virtual drive (and the additional memory also costs money), the third for the need to remotely send tests because its own is not pulling, etc. Put yourself a normal computer with a modern operating system and do not have to do anything. I have changed my desktop and the operating system, while my friend hasn't yet. We ran the same optimization for comparison (purely as a performance experiment). It took him 10 hours to run MT4, it took me 17 minutes.
I don't want to offend or humiliate XP users. I want to convince them that they can live better, that they don't need to waste their time devising various solutions and just do what they need and, most importantly, get quick results.
Very interesting, I will go and read about RAM-disk when you will give me a thousand bucks and we'll talk about the new computer and the 7th :)
There's no time to pick up the slack, the money's like water through the fingers, and you're talking about a new computer. A new computer is when this one dies, and there's no other way.
The computer has been working hard for 7 years already (think about 7 years and it is at the level of modern 2 cores x 3GHz, when they will release 16 cores and 5-6GHz per core then I will buy it, meanwhile they are stuck in the top performance),
This year I did an overhaul, re-soldered all the electrolytes. Now it's all good and stable. I'm thinking maybe I can overclock it, it's up to 3.8 GHz, but I pity, the processor will crumble in 5 years. Look at the obituary, it's only 12 years old and it will crumble because of extreme overclocking :)
Speaking of which, maybe that's why your friends have XP crashes, it usually runs on old hardware, and there's just the iron and sprinkled, electronics like service too.
I have a laptop still under my wife, 2 cores x 1.6GHz x64 it has a seven, often have to wait for 5-10 minutes when the application will close (yes what there will close just switch window). This is your glorious W7. I got XP still running on Celeron 333Mhz and everything is stable.
I don't agree with it. The most stable wind is XP.
When 7 appeared, I also tested everything by myself. When I saw that the system was stable and even intelligent in many places, I forgot about XP to the detriment of speed.
yes it is faster on ancient computers, all the windows fly with the speed of light. no time to think. with 7 this starts with a certain computer power.
But since my computers (and laptop) have all been upgraded to modern level for a long time, it's stupid and unreasonable to use 7.
XP is there, it rules, it's faster. But 7 is supported by M$ and software is written to run on it.
That's where I can't say anything against it, the diagnosis is completely correct.
No one buys XP for new computers anymore.
Very interesting, I will go and read about RAM-disk, when you think about giving me a thousand bucks let's talk about a new computer and 7 :)
I hope the tendency to move to 8 won't break. I have no time to think about money like water slips through your fingers when you're talking about a new computer. A new computer is when this one dies, and there's no other way.
The computer has been working hard for 7 years already (think about 7 years and it is at the level of modern 2 cores x 3GHz, but when they will release 16 cores and 5-6GHz per core then I will buy it, meanwhile they are stuck in the top performance),
This year I did an overhaul, re-soldered all the electrolytes. Now it's all good and stable. I'm thinking maybe I can overclock it, it's up to 3.8 GHz, but I pity, the processor will crumble in 5 years. Look at the obituary, it's only 12 years old and it will crumble because of extreme overclocking :)
Speaking of which, maybe that's why your friends have XP crashes, it usually runs on old hardware, and there's just the iron and sprinkled, electronics like service too.
I have a laptop still under my wife, 2 cores x 1.6GHz x64 it has a 7, often have to wait for 5-10 minutes when the application will close (yes what there will close just switch window). This is your glorious W7. I got XP on my Celeron 333Mhz and everything is stable.
I don't agree with it. The most stable wind is XP.
But it is probably more correct to say not old/new, but the "state" of the hardware. The appropriate "state" is the appropriate software. I mean, one can hardly expect to put 7th x64 on a Pentium 4 with 256 m of RAM.
I don't notice any smartness in my sevens. it does what i need from the first time. but here's what i remember. in grU i was very annoyed with occasional message about insufficient rights. and what the fuck can i do (without going into details...) and what immediately charmed me about sevens - a bunch of properties can be changed easily either by opening a public "hot button" or right-clicking a window. in grU the same thing only through policy. and it should be noted that in 8-ka if you copy something from drive D: to FILES folder on drive C:, it will pop up the same window "not enough rights". but interestingly, the window has a "continue" button. and what is characteristic, really continues without any hint to the change of rights or "as admin".
So, again, I'm not criticising XP at all. I also used to use it for a few years. I upgraded to a new system as soon as I had any. I switched from old to Vista and added up to 4G of memory, then switched to 7th and added 8G. I should have put 32g and i should say i got only positive emotions after porting to new system. i don't regretted it once. i hope the trend to 8g won't break.
And he toiler does not give up 7 years already (think about 7 years and it is still at the level of modern, the same 2 cores x 3GHz, not when they will release cores 16 and 5-6GHz per core, then I will buy, but now stumped at the top performance),
Zhunko:
And he is a hard worker and does not give up 7 years (think about 7 years and it is still at the level of today, the same 2 cores x 3 GHz, not when they will release cores 16 and 5-6 GHz per core, then I will buy, but now stumped at the top performance),
http://www.tilera.com/products/processors/TILE-Gx_Family
http://www.ixbt.com/news/hard/index.shtml?15/63/13
http://lenta.ru/news/2009/12/03/intel/
"A product cannot change its price and its status from paid to free and vice versa once it has been published on the Market."
-Why? This is a very, very strict restriction with completely incomprehensible logic to me!
The price should not be determined solely by the Author - the main thing in pricing is, after all, the demand for the product!
The Author can be mistaken in the initial estimation of his/her creation, but the market will put everything in its place automatically!
Using the current mechanism, the author would practically have to guess how his product would be evaluated by potential buyers, even for someone already experienced in sales this prediction may not correspond to reality, let alone for newcomers!
And you deny even the slightest opportunity to correct something in the value of the originally overestimated by the author code! (In the case of undervaluation it would also be very offensive, although less critical, of course)
Could it be that the technical difficulties of implementation (and I don't see anything else as a reason for such an inflexible decision) were so substantial that they outweighed the long-term prospects for lost profit from that 20% commission for products that could have been sold but will "gather dust on the shelves" or will bring a penny instead of tens of rubles?
PS Perhaps I'm asking the question in the wrong topic, in the wrong discussion, if so, please tell me where to go.
"A product cannot change its price and its status from paid to free and vice versa once it has been published on the Market."
-Why? This is a very, very strict restriction with completely incomprehensible logic to me!
..........
After a lot of persistent suggestions from Metakwots I registered there... To see what, why and why.
It turns out I can only publish one file, and that's only *.EX4 or *.EX5. Why?! What if the product consists of several modules? Why DLL's may not be published?
It turns out you can only publish one file, and that's only *.EX4 or *.EX5. Why?! What if the product consists of several modules? Why can't I publish a DLL?