What would it take to get everyone to finally switch to MT5? (collecting opinions) - page 45
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
Renat, I'm amazed at your insistence on adding a fly in the ointment...
There's a great multifunctional platform created, but abandoning the essentials of the old platform undermines everything...
What's wrong with it? Both platforms co-exist, no one is being forced away from the 4. As long as there is demand, there will be supply. What about advertising for the 5? - Who's advertising the old product?)
Renat, I'm amazed at your insistence on adding a fly in the ointment...
I agree. And if MT6 comes out the next day, I'll be able to do something about it.
I agree, What if MT6 comes out the day after tomorrow and what do I do? Give up all the good stuff that was in MT4 and MT5, and contentedly jump in to master the newness from 0? That's not the way to go...
Why is that a problem? Both platforms co-exist, no one is being forced away from 4. As long as there is demand, there will be supply. And the 5's advertising? - Who's advertising an old product?)
It is such a shame that they introduce a lot of new and good things but cannot fix the little things for the sake of convenience...
... and they can do it in five minutes...It's such a shame that they introduce a lot of new and good things, but can't fix the little things to make them better...
...and it's the kind of thing that can be implemented in five minutes...In a complex system, things are not so easy to fix, one thing clings to another...
I agree, but what if MT6 comes out the day after tomorrow and what do I do? Give up all the good stuff that was in MT4 and MT5, and contentedly run off to learn the new thing from scratch? This is not the way ...
And you make programs independent of the terminal, or at least almost independent. After all, there is such a possibility.
In a complex system, things are not so easy to fix-correct, one thing clings to another...
would it be difficult to enter a menu item "skip useless results"? as it is in f4 and is already implemented there...
and interrupting the optimisation-forward test event chain by adding a button to start a forward?
Reset the results to an already existing ORT file, and go ahead and run forward whenever you want using saved ORT file...
why should I as a user be forced to do the same with different crutches and excel?
would it be difficult to enter the "skip useless results" menu item? as it is in f4 and is already implemented there...
and interrupt optimize-forward test event chain by adding a button to run forward? a piece of cake for them...
Reset results to ORT file has already been implemented, and go ahead and start forward whenever you like using saved ORT...Create a separate thread on your proposal. If you get support, you'll see that developers will scratch their heads.
Start a separate thread on your suggestion. If you are supported, the developers may start scratching their heads.
They do not need it, a thousand times it has been written and expressed in different places, but it's still there...
don't they understand that nobody needs a bunch of 200 000 passes with useless results, and if there are millions of passes...
It's not so easy to add it to Fours, but based on needs and logic, so what's suddenly changed in Fours...
They don't need it, it's been written and expressed a thousand times in various places, but it's still there...
Don't they understand that nobody needs a bunch of 200,000 passes with useless results, and if there are a million passes...
You don't get it in four, and it's not so easy to add there, but based on their needs and logic, so what suddenly changed in five ...
What if you don't need an MC? Why not put a few lines in the EA code and let it write whatever it wants in the logs.
I don't think it's about the fact that you can't implement it yourself in the code, but it has to be implemented because it's essentially nothing that the developer can't implement himself, so it seems that you're being hacked, and do you want to go to the place where you get hacked?
I don't think so...
In essence it's the same as when you don't hold out your hand with a note but simply hold it in your hand, forcing you to reach over and grab it, you may be able to grab it and it will be given to you but you realize you're being abused...