POLL: should IB just focus on data and executions and drop everything else?

Discussion in 'Data Sets and Feeds' started by chewbacca, Dec 11, 2007.

  1. here's all the things about IB that suck:

    * data - (no tick by tick data, and no historical data)
    * charts - stop working everytime the do a new release
    * analytics like DOM, ect. - lots of features like the volume histrogram only work in a random manner, works on some days and not on others.
    * news - RFLMAO
    * fundementals - RFLMAO
    * customer service - becuase so many features of TWS work so randomly and TWS has so many bugs its ridculous.

    so here is the FINAL SOLUTION:
    IB needs to just focus on DATA and ORDERS/EXECUTIONS and DROP EVERYTHING ELSE instead of OFFERING SHIT THAT DON'T WORK OR ONLY WORKS RANDOMLY.........WITH ALL THEIR MONEY THEY CAN BUY A VENDOR LIKE QUOTETRACKER (QT already taken by Ameritrade), NINJATRADER, BUTTONTRADER ON THE CHEAP to function as the trading front end and for charting and analytics and charge a reasonable monthly fee to keep it top of the line.
  2. They should drop data and charts altogether. Instead, they should open their interface so I can buy two or three 3rd party tick-by-tick datafeeds and plug them into the IB TWS for redundancy. Same with charting. They should stop dedicating developers to improving charting at all.

    I am curious about the Futuretrade platform they acquired. I guess we can all demo it within a few months once integration is done.
  3. Wheres the Poll. LOL.

    All the stuff Aside from data, that you mentioned are all the things I DONT use. (except for Booktrader... Sometimes, that is. Never used the histogram, turned it off, thought it was a waste of time.)
  4. Yes I believe part of the reason they bought it was for their software. Just guessing that it has to be much better the the POS IB puts out.

  5. Their data is so bad, and they only allow 100 symbols at a time, they should just drop that nightmare as well.

    A purely execution platform would be best, throw all the other useless crap out, save money, and give the difference back to their traders in the form of reduced commish.
  6. Catoosa


    IB should know best what needs to be included as part of TWS to support IB's broad and ever expanding customer base. I wish IB had bought QuoteTracker before Ameritrade bought QT; However, IB's software developers could likely develop a QT like program for less than the purchase price of QT.
  7. IMHO IB's sole focus should be on brokerage. I want reliability and accuracy of executions, order simulation. None of this other stuff is useful to me.

    My best regards,
  8. stevenao


    0.3s snapshots have some advantage. It is the bandwidth requirement. My trading style doesn't requirement to have tick by tick data. So, I am fine.

    Booktrader is what I have problem in recently with they new changes.

    vote for it on IB feature pool here..


    search for "Booktrader \"Close Position\" Handling"
  9. Yes, supposedly its "institutional grade". Then again, I'd rather not get too excited before being disappointed. Just gotta stay patient until we all can take a first-hand look.
  10. I don't know the numbers but my guess is they already spent 10 times as much on what they now call 'charting' software in TWS. You have no idea how costly software development is. I agree about the issue though, they should have bought QT.

    I think it would be best to split TWS in a core API execution platform, maybe a sperate lean trade interface, and all the rest that nobody uses. I like the idea of allowing plugin data-sources from other providers. One of the providers could be IB themselves, because I actually like their 'compressed-tick' format.
    The other features should be separate modules, not loaded by default. Most serious clients don't use any part of TWS except it's API :)
    #10     Dec 12, 2007