Hi Craig, Contrary to you, I have not the faintest idea of what IB's decision makers are thinking or planning. All I can say is that I think they did rather well up till now. They probably have a lot of IT problems to take care of, not unlike my own, albeit smaller ones. You are slightly off with your: "GUI application of the complexity of TWS developed in Python". In fact, the system I am running for my own profit and pleasure is QUITE a bit more complicated than TWS-client. Also GIU, intensive graphics, db, realtime, you name it. Even packaging it with an installer for windoz wouldn't be such a terrifying problem. Of course, it would require some work. After all they put 4 or 5 years into their current TWS. They have the advantage now to know what to put in it and what not. If you would take some time to read up a bit on what people do with Python, you might change your mind on this. As to Python's cousin, Ruby, I didn't follow this in detail in the US but it appears that in Japan, Ruby is very much used on an industrial level. (AFAIK, Ruby in fact is of Japanese origin) They also ain't dummies there. As to your speculations on the way IB management spends its time, I think that they probably have figured things out already, one way or another (they better did). We'll find out some day. I sincerely wish IB well and I hope they stay on top. The last couple of months, for me, their system ran well. They probably kicked a few butts here and there. As nitro suggested, they should do some more work on "bringing FIX to the people" like they did with TWS some years ago. There is almost no "smart & people-friendly" competitor in this field. For me getting rid of platform and/or proprietary software (Java) dependent client software is a FIRST PRIORITY. (This opens a can of worms in answering whether Java, QT or others are really OSS or not.) However Java vs. QT+Python or other combinations require careful study. Dogmatic answers will certainly fail within a short time span.
Yes, but it's not deployed over thousands of machines outside of an "IT environment". I'm not saying thay Python is not up to the job, just that I would like to see examples. And I'm really not trying to get inside the minds of IB management. These issues will be considered by any any IT organization considering "newish" tools and technologies.
sorry to digress from the conversation but to confirm the FIX question... you're correct. the $100 is a minimum monthly commission. I think that's fair. There are additional costs on our side and if you're not doing over $100 a month in commission via a FIX connection, you probably wouldn't want to consider it anyway. The $500 one time fee is because FIX needs to be certified and resources need to be dedicated to certifying a connection.
Hi IB, Perhaps you should give this a try: (1) Keep on going with your current TWS; (2) Put together another one, without bells & whistles, that people can install on their linux systems. (No ladders, few buttons, no charts, but GOOD API.) Practically all distro's come with kde-Qt bindings enabled already or installable without effort; (3) You may be surprised about what you'll find out! PS: even some of the smarter windoz die-hards might be happy with the qt4-free version. It should not be too difficult for those to follow suit. A bit harder than in linux, but that's always the price to pay for windoz. Good sailing TWS, nononsense
Does IB programmers know how to program a verification step in the order entry process?? Maybe they could hire some contract labor to come in for a afternoon and do it. I figure it would take about 10 mins.
rather than be rude and sarcastic, how about reading the manual and you'll see it can easily be done. go to your order config set the minimum size to 0 and it will ask you to confirm each trade.
A common problem for corporate developers: Often companys have NO research lab/computing environment. Therefore they do not have the ability to test new platforms, try new API's etc. Even in companies that claim their computing infrastructure and technologies are strategic to the business I have observed this problem. Give your people the freedom and ability to research things rather than parrot marketing blurbs from vendors and you will be amazed at the results ....
prt, One grave danger for companies heavily depending on IT for running their business is that top management might allow itself to be put in a situation where nobody upstairs still has a clear grasp of the vital IT technology issues involved - I don't say that this is the case at IB right now. In such situation, top management have effectively put low ranking hackers into the driver's seat. They really - often unwittingly - abandoned control of the company at the mercy of a bunch of corporate-know-nothings. The only thing that remains is praying for the best. You remember those jokes of some years ago about the surest way to wreck a company? (1) incompetence (slowest); (2) women (most pleasant); (3) computers (quickest).