FEATURE POLL. DATA MANAGEMENT (1)

Questions about MultiCharts and user contributed studies.

Data Management Features (1)

Tick Filter
9
13%
Multiple sessions. Session templates can be chosen from Format Symbol -> Settings. The templates are taken from QuoteManager -> Tools -> Session Templates.
2
3%
Constant Volume Bars (CVB). If a volume bar has not been completed by the session end, the remaining data is used to plot bars in the next session
3
4%
Download Scheduler with a column of data downloaded into QuoteManager
10
14%
Futures Rollover. See: http://www.ensignsoftware.com/help/rollover.htm and TradesStation 8.3
33
48%
Reload Data. You can choose how many days back the reload will go
12
17%
 
Total votes: 69

User avatar
Andrew Kirillov
Posts: 1589
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 31 times
Contact:

FEATURE POLL. DATA MANAGEMENT (1)

Postby Andrew Kirillov » 26 Mar 2008

Dear MultiCharts users,

Help us to make MultiCharts a better product. A product that would meet your needs and demands.

We have put together a list of the features that have been most often requested over the past few months. You are now invited to vote for the features that you would like to see implemented in the future versions of the program. The items with most votes will receive the highest priority and will have the biggest impact on our plans

With the best regards,

TS Support Team
Last edited by Andrew Kirillov on 19 Jun 2008, edited 1 time in total.

2haerim
Posts: 502
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Been thanked: 2 times

Can I vote for multiple items?

Postby 2haerim » 26 Mar 2008

Can I? It seems only one time vote.

bowlesj3
Posts: 1977
Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 395 times

G01.F0001.001 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456

Postby bowlesj3 » 28 Mar 2008

Hi,

I voted but wanted to vote for two items.

Here are some ideas on voting.
I am not sure of the limits of this software but here goes.

Set aside a forum for voting. (one per product).
One thread per feature so others can read and possibly adjust how they would have voted.

Use a numbering system in the initial subject (three threads needed for this example).

(Example:
FR001.000 is data playback.
FR001.001 is data playback with forward backward jump.
FR001.002 is data playback with speedup slowdown (no bar distorting).

Another prefix structure to consider for sorting the threads together:
G01.F0001.001 (Group 01, Feature 0001. subfeature 001)
I tried it in the subject and it gives 46 characters for description.
It is not a lot so the first post would need to give a good description.

Maybe a special post at the top could describe the groups.

If it is possible, it makes sense to me to have the feature request forum directly below the problems and questions forum on the product.

I just found the botton for searching this forum. I see that it can be sorted so I guess these ideas would basically work.

Allow the users to create a new feature. However I am not sure how you would ensure a proper new prefix. It may be good enough to simply have instructions at the top of each thread and if possible have a popup of these when new threads are created. If the user has to choose the number then they need the threads sorted by prefix and will need to see it inserted in the proper place after they create the new thread. This would allow them to verify it.

Ideally if the user could go back and update their vote that would be good but it requires a database program (or some method to link to the user's master file).
Last edited by bowlesj3 on 29 Mar 2008, edited 30 times in total.

User avatar
gautama2
Posts: 96
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Maybe this is a possibility to create a Feedback Center

Postby gautama2 » 29 Mar 2008


bowlesj3
Posts: 1977
Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 395 times

Postby bowlesj3 » 29 Mar 2008

using google and this search string "Software feature request system"
I got some interesting hits. The top one is especially interesting.

It appears that this web site is actually a forum on this very topic of "Bug tracking" & "feature request" software.
http://forums.devshed.com/development-s ... 69720.html


This is a negative article but I think valid.
http://www.37signals.com/svn/archives2/ ... quests.php

I am no expert on this topic but much along the line of thinking of the above article (and if specialized software is too expensive and time consuming to learn), I think the idea of setting asside a forum for the users to do all the work makes sense as long as they have instructions as to how to keep it organized and consistent. This way the company sees the total vote and the size of the thread and can decide if they should read the posts or not. If the users put in enough ideas in the sub threads for the main feature this would provide the actual specifications for the main feature and hopefully reduce the amount of rewriting created by later requests for change. So it is both the size of the thread and the number of sub threads and the total votes too that serves as the guide to what the market wants. Users would tend to only read the posts that they have an interest in voting on but would most likely want to read all the ideas as well (especially in the sub threads) to help them adjust their ideas before they actually vote.

Nick
Posts: 490
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Postby Nick » 31 Mar 2008

In my perhaps not so humble opinion accurate and timely data is critical for smooth operation of MC. So while none of these are particularly glamorous all of these features are extremely valuable.

User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 198
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Postby Geoff » 31 Mar 2008

Agree with Nick, I'd vote for all 6 of the above.

dupl
Posts: 158
Joined: 04 Jul 2007

Postby dupl » 31 Mar 2008

Receive realtime data from any Excel cell.
E.g. in the moment is is not possible to get data from Excel received over ActiveX or DDE from TWS, into MC.

traderstuff
Posts: 68
Joined: 24 Jul 2005

Postby traderstuff » 05 Apr 2008

Andrew,

In your original post you suggest that the MC version of contract rollover ( continuous contracts ) will be the same or similar to what has been in Ensign for quite some time.

Does this also include the fill in data from DTN ?

I know this 'rollover' feature has been under discussion for over 2 years, (some of it is no longer available on this forum,afaik) and hopefully the MC implementation will be a great success.

I am in the process of upgrading my computer systems so do not know exactly what features are incuded in the newer 3 beta versions, but was wondering too if the 'fractional display' problems have been fixed so that some markets such as the US Bonds and Notes can be correctly charted and traded?

Best,

Tresor
Posts: 1104
Joined: 29 Mar 2008
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Postby Tresor » 15 Apr 2008

Hi Andrew,

As far as a 'contract rollover' or a continous future contract goes, I suggest that the switching from an older into the younger contract is effected on the moment when the open interest of the younger contracts exceeds or equals the open interest of the older contract, in line with what Jack D. Schwager suggest. The OI denotes the liquidity of a given contract, so the preference should be given to the contract of the highest liquidity.

Additionally, if I may, I would suggest that such a continous contract shows a sum open interest of the two contracts (the older and the younger) during the whole period.

I use some indicators that are based on open interest like Herrick Payoff Index and during the switches (when OI of older contract drops dramatically and so rises OI of the younger contract) these indicators just go crazy.

A combining of OI of both contracts would prevent false signals on these indicators.

Regards

User avatar
Marina Pashkova
Posts: 2758
Joined: 27 Jul 2007

Postby Marina Pashkova » 18 Apr 2008

Andrew,

In your original post you suggest that the MC version of contract rollover ( continuous contracts ) will be the same or similar to what has been in Ensign for quite some time.

Does this also include the fill in data from DTN ?


No, this isn't related to DTN.

I am in the process of upgrading my computer systems so do not know exactly what features are incuded in the newer 3 beta versions, but was wondering too if the 'fractional display' problems have been fixed so that some markets such as the US Bonds and Notes can be correctly charted and traded?


Fractional price scales are still not supported.

User avatar
Marina Pashkova
Posts: 2758
Joined: 27 Jul 2007

Postby Marina Pashkova » 18 Apr 2008

Hi Andrew,

As far as a 'contract rollover' or a continous future contract goes, I suggest that the switching from an older into the younger contract is effected on the moment when the open interest of the younger contracts exceeds or equals the open interest of the older contract, in line with what Jack D. Schwager suggest. The OI denotes the liquidity of a given contract, so the preference should be given to the contract of the highest liquidity.

Additionally, if I may, I would suggest that such a continous contract shows a sum open interest of the two contracts (the older and the younger) during the whole period.

I use some indicators that are based on open interest like Herrick Payoff Index and during the switches (when OI of older contract drops dramatically and so rises OI of the younger contract) these indicators just go crazy.

A combining of OI of both contracts would prevent false signals on these indicators.

Regards


Hi!

Thank you for the suggestions. We'll certainly take them into consideration when developing the contract rollover.

traderstuff
Posts: 68
Joined: 24 Jul 2005

Postby traderstuff » 20 Apr 2008

Thank You for the reply Marina.

Best,



Andrew,

In your original post you suggest that the MC version of contract rollover ( continuous contracts ) will be the same or similar to what has been in Ensign for quite some time.

Does this also include the fill in data from DTN ?


No, this isn't related to DTN.

I am in the process of upgrading my computer systems so do not know exactly what features are incuded in the newer 3 beta versions, but was wondering too if the 'fractional display' problems have been fixed so that some markets such as the US Bonds and Notes can be correctly charted and traded?


Fractional price scales are still not supported.

brendanh
Posts: 154
Joined: 07 Apr 2007

Postby brendanh » 09 Jun 2008

I voted futures rollover, but I think MC needs to completely review it's approach to data if it wants to step up and compete with the likes of TS.

I am a futures trader with IB and TS accounts. I currently use TS, and would like to switch to MC+IB because IB is a much better broker, and the MC platform is developed much faster than TS (eg multi-cpu for opts, etc). However, I don't think IB, or any other 3rd party data vendor will ever match TS, which has an integrated-data feed that makes data-management completely transparent and allows it to develop powerful data features like custom futures symbols for user-defined rollover. I think TSS needs to set up its own data feeds with the exchanges, and charge the same as TS (eg CME Globex futures for $40 pm). This will allow MC to match (and even improve upon) TS's data features, and avoid the need for MC users to manage symbols lists, etc.

I'm aware this would require investment by TSS as you would need to hire data management and integrity resources. However you would no longer have to write, support, and update middleware for lots of 3rd party vendors.

At the end of the day, traders want to think about trading, not managing data. I believe MC has the potential to be # 1 in the fast-growing market for retail trading platforms (the IB-autotrading feature is a TS-killer) but data is the one major stumbling block to its success.

Brendan

User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 198
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Postby Geoff » 10 Jun 2008

I voted futures rollover, but I think MC needs to completely review it's approach to data if it wants to step up and compete with the likes of TS.

I am a futures trader with IB and TS accounts. I currently use TS, and would like to switch to MC+IB because IB is a much better broker, and the MC platform is developed much faster than TS (eg multi-cpu for opts, etc). However, I don't think IB, or any other 3rd party data vendor will ever match TS, which has an integrated-data feed that makes data-management completely transparent and allows it to develop powerful data features like custom futures symbols for user-defined rollover. I think TSS needs to set up its own data feeds with the exchanges, and charge the same as TS (eg CME Globex futures for $40 pm). This will allow MC to match (and even improve upon) TS's data features, and avoid the need for MC users to manage symbols lists, etc.

I'm aware this would require investment by TSS as you would need to hire data management and integrity resources. However you would no longer have to write, support, and update middleware for lots of 3rd party vendors.

At the end of the day, traders want to think about trading, not managing data. I believe MC has the potential to be # 1 in the fast-growing market for retail trading platforms (the IB-autotrading feature is a TS-killer) but data is the one major stumbling block to its success.

Brendan


Do you have a list of exchanges you would like to see supported?

brendanh
Posts: 154
Joined: 07 Apr 2007

Postby brendanh » 10 Jun 2008

The CME Globex exchange is the most popular as it contains the emini-S&P, Russell, eurodollar, EuroFX, etc. TS do 3 packages:
eminis only for $25,
all electronic contracts for $40,
electronic + pit + full market depth for $55.

But ideally you'd also have NYMEX for things like Oil, CBOT for softs (or perhaps they're now on CME also?), EUREX for the DAX, etc.

User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 198
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Postby Geoff » 10 Jun 2008

The CME Globex exchange is the most popular as it contains the emini-S&P, Russell, eurodollar, EuroFX, etc. TS do 3 packages:
eminis only for $25,
all electronic contracts for $40,
electronic + pit + full market depth for $55.

But ideally you'd also have NYMEX for things like Oil, CBOT for softs (or perhaps they're now on CME also?), EUREX for the DAX, etc.


OK but I'm in London and trade LIFFE, LSE, LME, IPE. What about customers all over the rest of the world? The reason many of us bought MultiCharts is because we are not catered for by TS.

Tresor
Posts: 1104
Joined: 29 Mar 2008
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Postby Tresor » 10 Jun 2008


OK but I'm in London and trade LIFFE, LSE, LME, IPE. What about customers all over the rest of the world? The reason many of us bought MultiCharts is because we are not catered for by TS.


Geoff is right. I am from Europe too. But what about Asia, Australia and South Africa, Australia? This would take at least one year to cover worlds major exchanges.

I am not saying that it is a bad idea for TSS to expand their business by becoming exchange data vendor, but it needs to be done with respect for non-Amercian customers.

Regards

brendanh
Posts: 154
Joined: 07 Apr 2007

Postby brendanh » 10 Jun 2008

I agree the more exchanges the better. See listing of TS's of data exchanges: https://www.TS.com/fees/market_data_services.shtm, which is lacking many of the international exchanges you mention.

User avatar
Geoff
Posts: 198
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Postby Geoff » 10 Jun 2008

I agree the more exchanges the better. See listing of TS's of data exchanges: https://www.TS.com/fees/market_data_services.shtm, which is lacking many of the international exchanges you mention.


That's the point of supporting many 3rd party datafeeds, it would be impossible for any single vendor to cover every exchange in the entire world. As Tresor said it's fine for TSS to become a data vendor if it so desires but supporting as many other datafeeds as possible is a better way to go in my opinion.

brendanh
Posts: 154
Joined: 07 Apr 2007

Postby brendanh » 10 Jun 2008

Perhaps TSS should run a new poll for top 3 (or top 5, 10, etc) Exchanges that people would like to see included in an MC integrated-data platform.

Tresor
Posts: 1104
Joined: 29 Mar 2008
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Postby Tresor » 10 Jun 2008

Perhaps TSS should run a new poll for top 3 (or top 5, 10, etc) Exchanges that people would like to see included in an MC integrated-data platform.


Brendan, What would the poll be for if TSS haven't decided they want to be data vendor.

Regards


Return to “MultiCharts”