Stopping autoupdate on version 509.... possible? - page 2

 
gchrmt4:

I'm not trying to be difficult... but you yourself are persisting in documenting the HST format despite the MetaQuotes CEO telling you that the format of HST files is for their own private use only. How is this different? Why is one a legitimate subject for discussion, and the other not?

From the Terminal help file . . .

Historical File Format (HST Files)

The database header is the first

struct HistoryHeader
{
int version; // database version
char copyright[64]; // copyright info
char symbol[12]; // symbol name
int period; // symbol timeframe
int digits; // the amount of digits after decimal point in the symbol
time_t timesign; // timesign of the database creation
time_t last_sync; // the last synchronization time
int unused[13]; // to be used in future
};

then goes the bars array (single-byte justification)

#pragma pack(push,1)
//---- standard representation of the quote in the database
struct RateInfo
{
time_t ctm; // current time in seconds
double open;
double low;
double high;
double close;
double vol;
};
#pragma pack(pop)

it's published in the Help . . . despite what the CEO says . . . I suspect something got lost in translation.

 
RaptorUK:

From the Terminal help file . . .

it's published in the Help . . . despite what the CEO says . . . I suspect something got lost in translation.


My last post on this subject; I won't pursue the point further than this...

I have already agreed with you that Renat is talking nonsense. (I don't think it was lost in translation. My suspicion is that it was a hurried and ill-considered excuse because they hadn't thought-through the implications of changing the .hst format.)

But, nevertheless, you are choosing to ignore a direct statement from the MetaQuotes CEO on one subject where you do have a personal interest, while making up your own rules on another subject which I don't think interests you. Frankly, I think your reaction would be different if you had a personal interest in being able to block the updates.

 
gchrmt4:


My last post on this subject; I won't pursue the point further than this...

I have already agreed with you that Renat is talking nonsense. (I don't think it was lost in translation. My suspicion is that it was a hurried and ill-considered excuse because they hadn't thought-through the implications of changing the .hst format.)

But, nevertheless, you are choosing to ignore a direct statement from the MetaQuotes CEO on one subject where you do have a personal interest, while making up your own rules on another subject which I don't think interests you. Frankly, I think your reaction would be different if you had a personal interest in being able to block the updates.

I do have a personal interest in blocking the update and I have blocked it on my Laptop. I'm not making a rule, I'm just suggesting it's not a good idea to discuss this here . . . for more than one reason. I can see any discussion being censored and any useful approach may end up being negated by MetaQuotes all the sooner.
 
RaptorUK:
I do have a personal interest in blocking the update and I have blocked it on my Laptop. I'm not making a rule, I'm just suggesting it's not a good idea to discuss this here . . . for more than one reason. I can see any discussion being censored and any useful approach may end up being negated by MetaQuotes all the sooner.

I don't see that in MT EULA when installing new MT4.

MT EULA said we agree to "receive updates". Receiving updates can be in many form, commonly it can be from downloading or copy/cut-paste from other storage - such us flash drive.

MT EULA does not says that we should agree to install and/or to upgrades those updates even though MQ software "may download and install updates from MetaQuotes automatically".

In short, we should "agree to receive such updates", but it does not says we should "agree to install and to upgrade", it only says "may download and install updates from MetaQuotes automatically".

(ADD : I just visit my favorite brokers and get their latest installers, it still download and install old 509, good)

2.10 Updates to and New Versions of the MetaQuotes' Product and Software: MetaQuotes, in its sole discretion, reserves the right to add additional features or functions, or to provide programming fixes, updates and upgrades, to the MetaQuotes' Product and Software. MetaQuotes has no obligation to make available to You any subsequent versions of the MetaQuotes' Product and Software.

From time to time the MetaQuotes' Software may download and install updates from MetaQuotes automatically. These updates are required to maintain software compatibility, provide security updates or bug fixes, or offer new features, functionality or versions. You agree to receive such updates from MetaQuotes in order to continue using the MetaQuotes' Product and Software. You may have to enter into a renewed version of this Agreement, in the event you download, install or use a new or updated version of the MetaQuotes' Product and Software.


 
onewithzachy:

I don't see that in MT EULA when installing new MT4.


Not sure I understand, you don't see what in the EULA ?
 
onewithzachy:... You agree to receive such updates

So someone agrees to the above and then turns around and block the updates... how is that following the EULA?

 
RaptorUK:
Not sure I understand, you don't see what in the EULA ?

I don't see what you said or what we do here in this topic is against the EULA.


 

Everyone on this forum have a personal interest in something. People generally try to interpret the rules, eula, documents to favor their views. But ... lets not forget this is meta-quotes forum. They sit on-top the chain in terms of censorship. This is the reason I do-not get aggressive with mq-staff on this forum. I don't have any power and in the end they could render my post irrelevant by deleting them.

 

@onewithzachy, what do you think they really meant when they wrote that paragraph? Read the whole thing in context instead of partial sentences and the meaning is clear isn't it?

 
onewithzachy:

I don't see what you said or what we do here in this topic is against the EULA.

OK, I wouldn't disagree so far . . . Chasing breaches of the EULA is a little outside my scope though . . . and beyond my pay grade
Reason: