Goodbye robot - hello marasmus - page 15
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
Go and repeat MetaTrader 4/MetaTrader 5. After all, this is "a perfectly standard task, long riddled and solved many times over".
Unfortunately, everyone who tries to implement it loses tens of millions of dollars and goes bankrupt. I have counted 2 companies that have stated such explicit/clear goals and gone bankrupt cleanly. There are also a number of companies which did not set 100% targets but died anyway.
I also recommend to think about C++ compilers, which are completely extinct for Windows platform. And no gcc/slang/intel is able to present even a slightest chance of competing with MSVC. Apparently, no one is able to implement a completely standard compiler.
The price of repeating MetaTrader 4/MetaTrader 5 functionality from scratch based on Open Source software, including the server part, is around $300K if you work with competent designers and managers.
Of course, in this case the situation of rewriting everything from scratch must be considered from the very beginning because it demonstrates the initial flaw of the project's architecture and low-literacy of the managers who allowed this low-quality work and waste of investors' money.
There are dozens of C++ compilers already written, e.g. http://www.thefreecountry.com/compilers/cpp.shtml. There are also sufficient quality free compilers for Windows, the same MSVC. Also if necessary, you can always negotiate about licensing of ready compilers at a reasonable price, at that it can be free for a trader as well. So the compiler is the least of the problems, it is more important to build a viable business model. Most traders use МТ4/5 not because it's such a good and handy compiler, it's far away from even a middling compiler, but for commercial reasons.
I believe that the companies that went bankrupt were run by managers who didn't have clear and competent business plan and understanding of the market situation, while their software products could have been written with high quality and competently according to requirements specification.
It costs about $300K to replicate MetaTrader 4/MetaTrader 5 functionality from scratch based on Open Source software, including the server part, if you work with competent designers and managers.
10 programmers X $3K/month = $30K per month for salaries alone, not including other costs... I.e. $300K max for a year.
For me MT4/5 doesn't suit me at all in many ways, but I can't call it ordinary software. Serious near-market software - millions of dollars for development, not one hundred a year for staff.
No one has been able to squeeze it out, because the strategy chosen by those who want to do so is wrong. However, it is realistic and will be squeezed by all means. There is no frontal approach, but a more global approach is needed. So to speak, to see the whole market at once and to anticipate its main development trends.
kbw74614:
Serious near-market software requires millions of US dollars to develop, not one hundred a year to maintain the staff.
Anybody can do it for millions of dollars, even if they have to rewrite it several times. But to do it all at once and for 300K$ you need to hire qualified people. ))
"Get the right people" means get people who already know what they're doing. That is, guys who have already worked in the field. It's either the Metaks or the remnants of previously bankrupt teams. Everyone else is from scratch. And you really have to rewrite a lot from scratch. The same Metaks have rewritten a lot from scratch. And in many ways now they are hostages of their architectural silliness in some points - they would like it to work differently, but can't - the architecture is so overgrown that it is not fixable. Only crutches.
They would be glad (they won't admit it, of course) to change a lot, but they cannot. It is impossible to foresee everything at the stage of laying the foundation. It is normal.
In short, we are not talking about anything. You'd better help.
It is impossible to foresee everything at the foundation stage. It is normal.
For some people it is impossible and normal, and for others it is not. Why generalize your theory and beliefs to all mankind, people are different.
A competent person from scratch can make a quality, well-designed thing, even if he or she is not quite in this field, and if he or she is not quite competent, even if he or she is from this field, then you have to throw everything away and redo it all over again. It's kind of obvious.
Your calculations are not even included, they are illiterate in essence - in programming the number of programmers does not always translate into quality, on the contrary, it often happens. Furthermore, not everything must be written from scratch - most things have already been written and can be used ready-made, and you have not considered this either - hence the skewed conclusions with price estimates. Again, how to put a question with payment and terms of reference, if it is a monthly fee, even for the level of 2nd class it is clear that it is always more profitable to pull a string - hence the output of your millions of dollars and worthless results.
Naive talk of programmers on how to achieve business objectives :)
Yeah, funny. I'm not a programmer at all. I haven't written a single program, honestly.
Though, I know managers of some highly developed IT-companies who never wrote a line of code and never will. But with their business talents they have managed to build powerful developing IT solutions.
Anyway, a programmer is just a cog in the machine. Not the steering wheel.
I also recommend thinking about C++ compilers, which are completely extinct on the Windows platform. And no gcc/slang/intel is able to present even a minuscule chance of competing with MSVC. Apparently, no one is able to implement a completely standard compiler.
All the mentioned 'perfectly standard compilers' (gcc/slang/intel/ms) are far superior to MQL4++. Compared to them, MQL4++ compiler just "doesn't work". So it's hard to take your statement about "nobody is able to" on faith, meaning that you haven't managed to implement a compiler that would be at least of the same quality as the above-mentioned ones.
Go and reimplement MetaTrader 4/MetaTrader 5. After all, it's "a perfectly standard task, long since chewed up and solved by many people many times".
Unfortunately, everyone who tries to implement it loses tens of millions of dollars and goes bankrupt. I've counted 2 companies that have stated such explicit/clear goals and gone bankrupt cleanly. There are also a number of companies which did not set 100% targets but died anyway.
It wasn't about the whole trading platform, it was about its compiler and the environment for it, that is, a part of it.
Naive talk by programmers about how to achieve business objectives :)
Karl Marx already deduced that the purpose of business is not to create a socially useful product. The only aim of business is to make as much profit as possible. And the profit margin, in general, determines how criminal the way a particular business is run will be. In particular, at a profit margin of 300% "there is no crime that a capitalist would not commit, even on pain of the gallows". Since the rate of profit, in general, is not restricted by law or otherwise, it is easy to guess that the methods of achieving business objectives are criminal to some degree or another. There is also a corollary: business is in a position to destroy everything it touches.
However, what does this have to do with the quality of MQL4++ compiler implementation - some important, but - only part of a trading platform, and why appeal to the bad business experience of some companies in creating and promoting trading platforms in this issue?