MT4 doesn't have long to live - page 22

New comment
 
Renat:

Don't be deceived, there are 5.5 people sitting on this "C# starship" and asking themselves questions about "yeah, you should build the infrastructure! In MetaTrader 4 /5 all the infrastructure is built, there is a lot of documentation and examples, and all you need to do is to use it.

Many programmers have chosen the "right" way of development, without understanding the essence of this business. As a result - a quiet death.

Naturally, infrastructure is fundamental, for any platform. I'm just saying that I don't know the reasons why the development of a new programming language MQL5 was chosen at the time (enormous financial/intellectual/labour cost) instead of using off-the-shelf solutions like C Sharp. As far as I understand, the only compelling reason was code security issues. And infrastructure could be built around any language, even QBasic.
 
jelizavettka:
Wow! Tough guy.

Translated from Russian into Russian: by "developer" in this case, we mean the company.
 
PapaYozh:

Translated from Russian into Russian: by "developer" in this case we mean the company.
I see) And I thought Renat was the one who cooked it all up.)
 
-Aleksey-:

They could have, but they could have stopped, which they did, because stability had been achieved, so that was the goal. If now there is no such goal, but only the pumping, then it is right I said - in the near future, the mass move to five is unlikely.

"Procrastination is an ongoing development process with us. This has always been the case for the last 12 years - very frequent build releases with feedback evaluations.

Given that there are few old-timers (7-8 years) here, and all 5 system releases have been with my direct involvement, I will show the standard plot (3 times manifested massively):

  • before the public beta there is a wave of "they won't make it, they're dead".
  • after the release of the beta, the wave of "nothing much, it's too early" appears.
  • after a long public testing with the release of 100 to 200 builds a wave of "we are ok with the previous system, the new one is rubbish, but the previous one is classic and stable!
  • then a couple more builds are released, traders get involved and third-party developers start writing add-ons and code, "everybody likes it".
  • Next, we start to write a new platform, slowing down the development of the previous one, there are statements "ok, you will soon be out of business, we can already feel it!", especially this wave is felt by the developers of other terminals, who "want to take the lead".
  • 1-2 years pass, the competitors get bolder, the statements get tougher, the brokers start to look on the side and the cycle goes to the beginning...
This has been the case with the last three systems. But the result is legitimate.
 

-Aleksey-:


if it is critical for him, if not, let him withdraw the counter orders. The trader has no agreement with NFA on the client's side, so he is free to trade with the broker's dealing desk according to the agreement with the broker. In addition - there is a clause of prohibition in 4 - who needs it. We have a lot of brokers who are active in the market and do not have any contracts with NFA, thus they are free to trade with the dilling brokers.

For lovers of lots and others who want to trade with several different TS on one account and on one instrument a bicycle was invented long ago on MT5:

Virtual Order Manager for order management in MetaTrader 5

 
C-4:
Naturally, infrastructure is fundamental, for any platform. I'm just saying that I don't know the reasons why the development of a new programming language MQL5 was chosen at the time (colossal financial/intellectual/labour cost), instead of taking advantage of off-the-shelf solutions like C Sharp. As far as I understand, the only compelling reason was code security issues. And infrastructure could be built around any language, even QBasic.

I am very pleased to see how our competitors have walked beautifully and continue to walk to the graveyard, choosing Java / .NET / Plugins as their infrastructure.

They did not understand the secret of viability and success in this field either. After all, it is much easier to take the cheap route.

 
PapaYozh:

Translated into Russian: By "developer" in this case, we mean a company.
In this case, we are talking about a person.
 
Renat:
Slightly off-topic, but since you're here. Renat, when will MT4 for Android be available?
 
DmitriyN:
Slightly off-topic, but since you're here. Renat, when will MT4 for Android be available?
In a couple of weeks, it's been a long time in the making.
 
Renat:

As long as the trader looks at the world only from the trader's point of view, there will be questions like "I do not understand why the trader is here" and advice like "let the broker twist".

Well, you cannot behave in such a way contrary to explanations and advice to look around. You know very well that the rules and regulations are set elsewhere, that there are many more parties involved in the process than "1 trader".

Some kind of double standard policy. When someone tells you about downloading of history, for example, you do not listen to anyone and do not see that this feature is available almost everywhere, and you encourage me to look around. You talk about your own experience, but you do not want to listen to traders' experience. Where is your integrity? In fact, you can implement counter transactions without violating the standards (allowing the broker to prohibit it), but instead you put the burden of managing netting on traders.
1...151617181920212223242526272829...83
New comment
Reason: