Services , new functionality in the MT5 architech, the funeral of MT4 is just around the corner. - page 3
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
The problem with MT5 is that in an attempt to expand beyond MT4, it acquires complex functionality, the presence of which requires a higher level of intelligence from users, but the market does not encourage users to expand their knowledge, because being educated does not guarantee profit. This is obvious and does not need to be proven. That's the nature of the market.
The platform is unique, it has features for every brain, taste and colour, so you do not have to learn everything it has, everyone uses only what he needs. Each of us makes things more difficult for ourselves - we always have the right to choose.
I am not sure that such a (probably not bad) thing as services will hammer the last nail in the coffin of MT4. It is very resilient and does not seem to wither at all. What makes you think it's already in the coffin? To finish it off you would need something much more powerful. For example, visual 3D robot programming with a full-fledged GUI available to primary schools children.
I absolutely agree.
When a choice is offered, there should be an evaluation criterion that allows you to make that choice.
Ever since MT5 was first introduced, I've been asking the question: if I rewrite my EA running on real-time from MT4 to MT5, how much will my profit increase? Profit is the main thing, it is a criterion of assessment in trading. In response they write about progress, education....
And I know for a fact that when transferring a really working MT4 EA to MT5, profits will fall as there will be errors generated by the new language, and more importantly a more complex language.
Profit considerations are the main reason for MT4's survivability.
I absolutely agree.
When a choice is offered, there should be an evaluation criterion that allows you to make that choice.
Ever since MT5 was first introduced, I've been asking the question: if I rewrite my EA running on real time from MT4 to MT5, how much will my profit increase? Profit is the main thing, it is a criterion of assessment in trading. In response they write about progress, education....
And I know for a fact that when transferring a really working MT4 EA to MT5, profits will drop because there will be errors generated by the new language, and more importantly a more complex language.
Profit considerations are the main reason for MT4's survivability.
I transferred my EA from 4 to 5, profit is exactly the same. This is why I have used mt4 and it is used in net trading, but on mt4 in fast market while it reverses the position the price can go up and the profit is higher, on mt5 it reverses instantly and that is why the profit stays as planned. But it may be the other way round, while in mt4 the price moves against it, so there is an incomplete profit. But in the end the profit is equal on the long trading section, and it does not depend on the platform.
If you think mt5 is bad just because you write codes with errors, then you are wrong, because you can say the same about any platform, that it is bad, because I write codes with errors.)
Yes, if all efforts of the developers in MT5 were aimed not at complicating the functionality, but at the possibility to radically improve the efficiency of market analysis, which would increase the chances to earn money compared to other platforms, then all traders in the world would move to this platform.
Of course, you can argue that there are ticks, multicurrency tester, cloud service, and so on. But that's not enough. I would like to have something that would facilitate finding entry and exit points. And with such intellectual power, which the methaquot company has, I think they would be able to do it.
I have been pushing this idea for several years now, and I even point out the relevant tool - R, which by the way is not the only one.
But within the framework of this thread I would like to state one more wish to develop the platform
I will give an example with R, although I understand that a number of forum users will not finish reading my bridge to the end.
So the ideology of R in the context of the ideology of a trading platform.
If you take the table of contents of R, the system is huge and for any beginner it is clear that it is impossible to study.
But this is absolutely not the case. Everything you need can be mastered, and quite quickly.
The R system consists of three independent parts: the algorithmic language R, mathematical (statistical packages) and graphics tools. The connecting link is the algorithmic language. But if you program in it, you don't know anything about other parts.
Let's move on.
Statistical packages. There are more than 10 000 of them. The ideology is the same: you learn only what you need, only what you assume will lead to a profit.
Algorithmic language R itself. R ranks next to C in the ratings of algorithmic languages. It seems to me R is superior to C in its algorithmic capabilities. Why does it seem so? Because it is based on the same principle: You still need a very narrow set of tools for full-fledged EA programming, which any person programming in MKL can master in a few hours and stop here.
I would love to see the same idea implemented in MKL: you learn a certain minimum. This is enough for profitable trading - forget the rest.
And all this talk about progress in commercial activity is inappropriate. Progress should increase profits, not compromise what you have.
...write suggestions, they will implement
Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Even from what is announced, there are many things that have not been done so far.
I'm not the only one, for example, who asked for the ability to track the timing of the cup and sentiment data on FORTS with millisecond accuracy. This would allow synchronisation with ticks and generally improve the quality of analysis. But... maybe... someday. Although, it's the kind of thing that was begging for after they made millisecond accuracy in ticks.
Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Even from what is announced, there are many things that have not been done so far.
I'm not the only one, for example, who asked for the ability to track the timing of the cup and sentiment data on FORTS with millisecond accuracy. This would allow synchronisation with ticks and generally improve the quality of analysis. But... maybe... someday. Although, this is the kind of thing that was begging for after millisecond accuracy was made in ticks.
Can't you track by timer through the bukivent or something?
Is it impossible to trace the timer through the "bukivent"?
This is still not the case as a timer setting frequency < 15ms makes no sense. And ticks can and often will come more frequently than this interval. Oh, and you also need to call the time request function. All in all... not a sync.
You need an exact time that can be requested from the terminal, not simulated. If the tick came in at .900ms, so that you can take a blind cast of the cup at .900ms and compare it to the previous tick (and the blind).
Also, the timer has a limitation:
Every mql5 program and every chart has its own event queue, where all newly arriving events are stacked. If there is already an event in theTimer queue or the event is being processed, the new Timer event is not placed in the queue of the mql5-program.
This is still not the case, as a timer setting frequency of < 15ms makes no sense. And ticks can and often will come more frequently than this interval. Oh, and you also need to call the time request function. All in all... not a sync.
You need an exact time that can be requested from the terminal, not simulated. If the tick came in at .900ms, so that you can take a blind cast of the cup at .900ms and compare it to the previous tick (and the blind).
Also, the timer has a limit:
so yeah, that's not good...
... You are a trader not them, why should they know what you need ahahaha :) make suggestions, they will implement
It's not good if the developers of the trading platform don't know what the trader needs. And I wrote the sentence quite clearly.
It's bad if the trader himself doesn't know what he needs, to begin with.
Yes, cap, that's very clear"I would like something that would make finding entry and exit points into the market at least slightly easier.
I think the psychic help section can help you