Does it make sense to switch from MT4 to MT5? Why did you switch to MT5? - page 5
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
A shovel is simpler than an excavator
This is not a fair comparison. The excavator gives a real advantage over the shovel. mt5 has offered nothing better than mt4 in real trading. Just complications. That's not to say there's no need to evolve. Just the question was about the meaning of the transition. There is no sense in it. If there was, there would be no question, only a desire to trade on a more useful platform.
30 products each,
For MT5 - 114 pp. Of these, paid -36 pp, there are rentals -19 pp. 53%. The rest is rubbish -95 pp.
For MT4 - 381 pp. of which paid -111 pp, there is rent -62 pp. 56%. The rest is rubbish -319 p.
Let's say only rentals are not rubbish.
Let's say. But not rubbish There are 62 pp in 4 and only 19 pp in 5. Same 3/1 ratio as in the full sample.
Although, I'm pretty sure it's unprofitable to look for diamonds in that rubbish, even if they are there.)
This is not a fair comparison. The excavator gives a real advantage over the shovel. mt5 has offered nothing better than mt4 in real trading. Just complications. That's not to say there's no need to evolve. Just the question was about the meaning of the transition. There is no sense in it. If there was, there would be no question, only a desire to trade on a more useful platform.
Once again.
If you use simple systems, based on different crossovers, breakdowns of levels( etc.) simple inbuilt indicators, then MT4 is a very good platform, there really is not much point in moving to MT5.
But if you have already played with those toys and grown to the realization that it's all kindergarten, and you want something more serious, going into the field of AI, then MT5 is really perceived as an excavator compared to a shovel.
Let it not be rubbish just the rent.
Suppose. But not rubbish There are 62 pp in the 4 and only 19 in the 5. Same 3/1 ratio as in the full sample.
Although, I'm pretty sure it's unprofitable to look for diamonds in that rubbish, even if they are there.)
Market compared. And kodobaza?
One more time.
If you use simple systems, based on different crosses, breakdowns of levels( etc.) simple built-in indicators, then MT4 is a very good platform, there really is not much point in going to MT5.
But if you have already played with those toys and grown to the realization that it's all kindergarten, and you want something more serious, going into the field of AI, then MT5 is really perceived as an excavator compared to a shovel.
Nikolai. There is no need to force the reckless sophomores to move to the third grade when they are good in the first - those who wanted knowledge have already moved, the rest at least to kindergarten - they are fed there and put to bed, and my mother picks them up.
So... it's just an associative thing... it's a wicked example :)
But archaeologists prefer a shovel).
Aren't you at least an amateur? And archaeologists prefer a shovel when they have to, and an excavator when they have to. You should at least learn how to use the Internet so as not to write nonsense on every occasion.
Once again.
If you use simple systems, based on different crossings, breakdowns of levels( etc.) with simple built-in indicators, then MT4 is a very good platform, it really does not make much sense to go to MT5.
But if you have already played with those toys and grown to the realization that it's all kindergarten, and you want something more serious, going into the field of AI, then MT5 is really perceived as an excavator compared to a shovel.
If you want to get serious, it makes no sense to use MT-MQL. Linking several C++ (aka R or Python or...) MoD libraries to MQL is a costly process, and modelling MoD in MQL is masochistic.
For MO-IE it's easier and faster to go into "standard" programming languages, and leave MT only the functions of the trading terminal and interface.
If you want to get serious, it makes no sense to use MT-MQL. Linking several C++ (aka R or Python or...) MoM libraries to MQL is a costly process, and modelling MoM in MQL is masochistic.
It's easier and faster to go into "standard" programming languages and leave MT only for the trading terminal and interface functions.
Because you don't understand anything about this MO and can only hook up libraries like monkeys, with absolutely no understanding of what they do.
If you want to do it more seriously, it makes no sense to use MT-MQL. Linking several C++ (aka R or Python or...) MoM libraries to MQL is a costly process, and modelling MoM in MQL is a perversion.
For MI it's easier and faster to go to "standard" programming languages, and leave MT only for the trading terminal functions and interface.
Oh, you don't know.
I'm aware of that.)) When it comes to fast-slow, it begs the question - What exactly is slow for? and - Is faster even necessary? For your tasks.
All Windows on DLL, all MT on DLL, all software on DLL, and you're talking about some kind of security.
As for Market - yes, those are the rules. If you work for Market, you have to get twisted. And you won't get anything but primitive - MT libraries are extremely limited. (And thank God for that.))
But if for yourself and really want MO etc. - then only leaving to "standard" languages.