How sad it is... - page 2
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
Please read:
As for the programmer - I was shocked when I saw how much unnecessary and superfluous work must be done, if to use MT5. The advantages of MQL5 (which I've also hoped for while waiting for its release) have become unreal.
I don't know about you, but I've seen a huge step back.
With all that MT4 is the undisputed leader - a very successful development and no one has done better, MT5 is a massive disappointment.
I hope that soon we will see at least MT6. Or better yet MT6 and MT7 where hedging with netting will be separated at their corners (as it should be).
Artem, maybe later I will read what you kindly gave me a link to. Or maybe not. There's a reason for that. I have not only adapted some of my EAs to MT5, but I' ve traded them for several months as well. I haven't noticed anything revolutionary in MT5. On the trader's side, there are a lot of inconveniences compared to MT4. Although not critical, but unpleasant. Beginning from the fact that thecommissions are only visible in history.
As for the programmer - I was shocked when I saw how much unnecessary and superfluous work must be done, if to use MT5. The advantages of MQL5 (which I've also hoped for while waiting for its release) have become unreal.
I don't know about you, but I've seen a huge step back.
With all that MT4 is the undisputed leader - a very successful development and no one has done better, MT5 is a massive disappointment.
I hope that soon we will see at least MT6. Or better yet MT6 and MT7 where hedging with netting will be separated at their corners (as it should be).
As for programmer, I was shocked when I saw how much unnecessary and superfluous work one has to do if writing under MT5. The advantages of MQL5 (which I also hoped for while waiting for its release) have suddenly become unreal.
For example ?
I get the impression, Vasily, that you are like that Dos programmer who complains that "you have to do a lot of unnecessary things to run a program in Windows". But the only problem is that it is these very "unnecessary things" that allow you to have a single interface for all simultaneously running programs under Windows, and, eventually, such a structure is present in all multitasking systems.
All this "extra" work is very necessary in order to be able to work in different areas more accurately. And to simplify - just write your own wrapper (or you can use Standard Library classes) - and have very simple functions to access the right elements.
And Artem is right about cross-platform code.
Not to mention the long-standing library of fxsaber, which allows you to use the MQL4 code in MT5 without any changes at all.
I read the beginning and thought that a man with a $20k licence was forced to start using MT5.
When I realised that it was MT4, I started laughing) Another person who had not "discovered" Metatrader.
Personally, I don't see the point of a GUI for robots at all...
I'll second that - you're not the only one who sees the usefulness of a sensible GUI, and not just now - I first heard of such a thing about ten years ago.
Moderators:
- This is going to be a long story, so instead of deleting it, put it in Miscellaneous.
Well, the story goes like this:
I was working at the time deputy director of marketing in the office engaged in sales. And we had a sub-producer (complete moron on sales).
The producer was producing and we were selling the "Encoding system for cable TV".
One day the producer wanted to give us a presentation of his know-how - the control program for their encoding system.
A delegation came to us in which I knew (at that time I was a newcomer in the company) only its director. But somehow I noticed initially a red-haired unassuming guy - he behaved differently.
So they show their miracle program, saying at the same time that it can and how many times will increase our sales. I was struggling with it - I look at it and see that it is unlikely to succeed.
I've been patient as long as I can, but I can't help myself. He said the following,
- And who are you suggesting this to? To the cable guy, who goes to the "computer" with trembling knees? He won't understand a thing about it! (it was the early nineties).
There was an awkward pause in the hall...
...and it was defused by a redheaded kid:
- Well, if you're so smart, don't give me that crap, just write it yourself! (referring to the user interface)
Understanding that this caustic remark was addressed to me, and remembering, that on my birthday party my good soul Zhenya Chernousov presented me a VisualBasic CD (I let slip to him casually, like "I know Basics"), I answered:
- "Yes, one at a time. I'll write a template and you tell him "work".
But I hadn't even seen VisualBasic CD yet...
It took me a week to master VisualBasic.
I also spent two weeks writing the program layout.
I did it.
Then I thought, "What the fuck's the layout for?" The system is controlled from the computer via the com-port, I've got what I need to do, all I need to do is send it to the com-port and it will work (without the ginger's involvement).
Said - done. Took me another week to figure out/test the com port and make it work. But it was worth it.
In a week I have already gathered a meeting and made a presentation.
About the reaction of the "redhead", it is probably not worth talking.
In parenthesis, Ginger was actually a very, very talented programmer. The maths he wrote for the coding system was simply tax-free. It was specifically a revolutionary development. But user interfaces, that was definitely not his thing. He wrote what he could understand. And he should have written it so that the Dummies would understand it.
In short, the verdict was as follows:
- the coding system will come with two variants of the control program.
- Cable users will decide for themselves what's best for them.
Ginger was out of luck...
It was my first user interface. And I didn't write it because I wanted to, but because I needed it for business.
Sales of our coding system went up many times over. And the point wasn't in the system itself - there were several similar systems by hardware.
And you say, "User interface is bullshit..."
I'll second that - you're not the only one who sees the benefits of a sensible UI, and not just now - I first heard this kind of thing about ten years ago.
Moderators:
- this is going to be a long story, so instead of deleting it, please move it to Miscellaneous.
Well, the story was like this:
I was working at the time deputy director of marketing in the office engaged in sales. And we had a sub-producer (complete moron on sales).
The producer was producing and we were selling the "Encoding system for cable TV".
One day the producer wanted to give us a presentation of his know-how - the control program for their encoding system.
A delegation came to us in which I knew (at that time I was a newcomer in the company) only its director. But somehow I noticed initially a red-haired unassuming guy - he behaved differently.
So they show their miracle program, saying at the same time that it can and how many times will increase our sales. I was tempted - I look at it and see that it is unlikely to succeed.
I've been patient as long as I can, but I can't help myself. He said the following,
- And who are you suggesting this to? To the cable guy, who goes to the "computer" with trembling knees? He won't understand a thing about it! (it was the early nineties).
There was an awkward pause in the hall...
...and it was defused by a redheaded kid:
- Well, if you're so smart, don't give me that crap, just write it yourself! (referring to the user interface)
Understanding that this caustic remark was addressed to me, and remembering, that on my birthday party my good soul Zhenya Chernousov presented me a VisualBasic CD (I let slip to him casually, like "I know Basics"), I answered:
- "Yes, one at a time. I'll write a template and you tell him "work".
But I hadn't even seen VisualBasic CD yet...
It took me a week to master VisualBasic.
I also spent two weeks writing the program layout.
I did it.
Then I thought, "What the fuck's the layout for?" The system is controlled from the computer via the com-port, I have written what I have to do, all I have to do is send it to the com-port and it will work (without Ginger's involvement).
Said - done. Took me another week to figure out/test the com port and make it work. But it was worth it.
In a week I have already gathered a meeting and made a presentation.
About the reaction of the "redhead", it is probably not worth talking.
In parenthesis, Ginger was actually a very, very talented programmer. The maths he wrote for the coding system was simply tax-free. It was specifically a revolutionary development. But user interfaces, that was definitely not his thing. He wrote what he could understand. And he should have written it so that the Dummies would understand it.
In short, the verdict was as follows:
- the coding system will come with two variants of the control program.
- Cable users will decide for themselves what's best for them.
Ginger was out of luck...
It was my first user interface. And I didn't write it because I wanted to, but because I needed it for business.
Sales of our coding system went up many times over. And it wasn't the system itself that was the trick - there were several similar systems by hardware.
And you say, "User interface is bullshit..."
In Humour, it will definitely stay that way.
And you say "User interface is bullshit..."
I didn't say that.
I said - I don't see the point of a GUI for a robot.
Plus - there has already been a very lengthy debate on this subject, and again, Peter Konov, unlike you (let's keep it to yourself) - even presented his solution. And it even did something. И ? Even Peter Konov himself doesn't seem to use his own GUI very much.
Before that, in that thread about Canvas, I also suggested that I should show the advantages and necessity of all these colorful pictures. And somehow it didn't work out.
The problem of all "goosers" is that all indicators in trading are actually intended to simplify representation of price movement (and volumes, when they are present). And all the guichniks' suggestions are, on the contrary, to DEFINITIZE the indicators. It makes absolutely no sense at all. And a robot does not need a GUI at all. In my opinion, it doesn't need any settings either, the maximum is the risk used. If it works, all settings should be "hardwired". When it stops working - that's it, you have to take it out of trade, and put the other one.
Otherwise...
Here's the simplest thing - you are saying "Ah, how difficult it is in MQL5, and the GUI features are missing". Ok ! Well, at least "in simple words" tell me what you want to do, what you are missing in that GUI. And most importantly - how it will help users BELIEVE more. I'm sure - if you can prove it - there will be people who will make you that GUI.
Well ? Propose it and prove it ! And you'll have a GUI.
la-la, blah, blah... (exact text above)
You can only convincingly answer that by writing a robot with and without interface and inviting the public to evaluate "which is better".
If those present here are able to accept this experiment on MQL4, I can prepare it in 15 minutes (breaking is not building).
Bottom line: with MT4, are you ready to evaluate the difference between the trading robot with and without GUI?
(It would not be superfluous to create a poll. And it should not involve programmers, but only users)