MT4 doesn't have long to live - page 24
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
Uploading your own story?
It's a step past that - we care about the overall stability of all processes, so we make a solution that minimizes problems across hundreds of thousands and millions of traders, including brokers. There have been enough problems because of the history in MT4.
That is, we are looking much wider than the position of the trader, who does not think about other people's techsupport, nor about other people's problems. The task of maximising the common good gives the solution "the history should be automatic with correction of any mistakes and never give a reason for its absence".
So there's no double standard - we're making a whole solution "click and get it" instead of "100 people out of N million have an opportunity to download their history, it's unclear where it came from".
No, I am generally satisfied with the MT5 system and I don't want the MT5 project to stop, of course there are difficulties with the historical data, but not about that
If in the Strategy Tester there was a ticker "use MT4 compatibility mode" which would set two opposite orders with 0 volume instead of closing a position at opening a counter order, then maybe the problem would disappear. 00, then maybe no more questions from inexperienced users "why lots don't exist, bring back lots!", I don't have problems with MT5, well, almost none...
I do not want to get rid of it.
Why does MT5, a priori, equalize two opposite positions of equal volume, of two different TS? Do the developers know my MM, the trading logic of the systems?
buy and sell of 1 lot, in a "random lot", may be of unequal importance.
I'm afraid it's you who don't know what you're talking about, and at the same time arguing with the developer of five generations of trading platforms, who has spent the last 12 years developing systems on a daily basis.
And zero time developing trading strategies....(no offence).
I have great respect for the results Metaquotes has achieved. I respect the results that Apple has achieved. The similarity between these companies is that both believe they know better what the average user of their product needs.
The near monopoly by Apple and Metaquotes in their niches confirms this in practice. However, there is a growing camp of other users. If on Apple's side, this camp is helped in the form of Android. But in the case of MetaQuotes there is no outside help. They only have their own individual developments.
Both MT4 and MT5 in their current form are of interest to professional traders only as a trading API. In this case the MT4 API is more sophisticated - more convenient, due to its own reliable implementation of virtual orders.
But those professionals are a drop in the ocean of users. So it's not worth doing anything for their "whims".
Uploading your own history?
It's a thing of the past - we care about the overall stability of all processes, so we make a solution that minimises problems across hundreds of thousands and millions of traders, including brokers. There have been enough problems because of the history in MT4.
No, I am generally satisfied with the mt5 system and I don't want the mt5 project to stop, of course there are difficulties with the historical data, but not about that
If in the Strategy Tester there was a ticker "use MT4 compatibility mode" which would set two opposite orders with 0 volume instead of closing a position at opening a counter order, then maybe the problem would disappear.00, then maybe there would be no questions from inexperienced users "why lots don't exist, bring back the lots!", I don't have problems with MT5, well, almost none...
Sooner or later the lockers will fix the system on mql5, so that the interface is indistinguishable from MT4. In other words, in the graphical panel will be displayed grid orders, and the balance will be calculated like on Mt4. There are all kinds of lovers of hindsight, for example, make emulators of some ZX-Spectrum on pentujahs. Moreover, given the graphical capabilities, they will add a Strip Forex in 3D format rendered via OpenSL, so that traders will not be bored: profit trade was closed, balance increased and the box opened something, when loss trade was closed - it closed. And so on and so forth.
All this is not a problem to reproduce MT4 or MT3 on MT5, if someone has nothing else to do. The point is that on MT4 it is by no means possible to reproduce P5's functionality. I.e. the process is irreversible.
C-4: instead of using off-the-shelf solutions like C Sharp
This is not a reply to Renat, but rather C-4. Partial repost of my post from a month ago - for those who haven't read it:
[...] Go to Ninja (C#) or Dukas (J++), if you want comparisons so much. Look at problems of ordinary users, [...] at their forums, at tech support. [...]
P.S. about ninja/dukas: and also - look at their services. Do they have anything similar to our "Work"? As far as I understand, the forum of both are full of trivial for programmers questions. Ask for prices of their services.
Technically, Dukas has an MQL4 -> J++ converter, but it's not very well made. You still need the help of an experienced coder, and it may cost you a pretty penny.
So you have to wonder who those platforms are for (traders or coders) and who MT5 is for.Sooner or later the lockers themselves will finalize such a system on mql5, so that the interface is indistinguishable from MT4. So, the chart panel will display grid orders, and the balance will be calculated like on Mt4. There are all kinds of lovers of hindsight, for example, make emulators of some ZX-Spectrum on pentujahs. Moreover, given the graphical capabilities, they will add a Strip Forex in 3D format rendered via OpenSL, so that traders will not be bored: profit trade was closed, balance increased and the box opened something, when loss trade was closed - it closed. And so on and so forth.
Beautiful... :-)
jelizavettka
TheXpert
RenatYou must have missed the beginning of the conversation.
It's not about the terminal. The terminal is good.
It's about programming bias in the design of the terminal. The conversation started with the tester, which the developers proudly call a "strategy tester". I and some others in this thread claim that the tester doesn't test any strategies - it's a cool specific program debugger. As an example, I gave that the tester doesn't answer the question about stability of TS. And other examples as well.
I'm putting the question in a wider way. We are fed with "programming tasty things" correlation of which with profitability of strategies is not obvious, to put it mildly. But the correlation between, for example, tools of artificial tick generation with specified statistical properties is obvious. And such means are elementary when creating systems in general, but they are absent in the tester, which presents a surrogate from this field.
Today, a bunch of trading functions are inserted into the programming language. Renat, defending the honor of his programming uniform, does not want to understand that if his MQL had such built-in functions for creating TS, for example, from EViews, instead of front end programming as suggested above, the MQL would gain much and the bias towards clouds and other stuff having no effect on the final profit would be eliminated.
There will still be some craftsmen who will reverse engineer the M1 format of the history file. So maybe it's better to make it official? At least for offline charts? After all, it's a useful thing.
Nice... :-)
No problem.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job
Any whim for your money.
--
I think it's better to strip in sync with the equity raise, and cover on the descent.
But I'm willing to implement the suggested locker option as well.
;)