GEEZ! I dared to mention this in another thread and the ID rep. def accused me of being an IB basher... I then pointed out that 1 in 6 or more threads on here complain about IB issues, and that the company should do a better job of addressing concerns directly to the customer, not on an anonymous message board...
I don't see how my post accused you of anything other than ignorance on what that route does. I certainly didn't accuse you of bashing IB. You said [Q]IB is associated with or owns the market making firm TimberHill - symbol TMBR on Level 2. I imagine they send all orders to TMBR whenever possible, probably does not help the fills...[/Q] Your post infers that the TMBR fills are inferior. They are instant and equal to or better than the NBBO. In the case above, I'm sure that if the client didn't receive a fill via TMBR, he would have received a slower fill at possibly a worse price. A full FAQ on the IB web site explains the TMBR route and how it benefits all sides.
Quote from TorontoTrader2: GEEZ! I dared to mention this in another thread and the ID rep. def accused me of being an IB basher... To add to what def said: Your post clearly accused IB of routing order flow to TMBR without customer's knowledge or consent, which is simply not true. If you use SMART, TMBR is one of the options it considers. If you specify a (non-SMART) route, it goes where you tell it. No hidden conspiracy here. I then pointed out that 1 in 6 or more threads on here complain about IB issues, Do you honestly think that other platforms don't have problems? I wish there were more posts on here about the many, many problems that Hammer has, but the truth is that they would fall on deaf ears, because the Hammer developer (yes one, AFAIK) doesn't read here, and neither does anyone else that could make a difference. Another possibility is that it has a less message-board-savvy group of users. Some people just don't get into discussing things in this type of forum. Hammer isn't any different than many of these other platforms - I just happen to have recent experience with it. and that the company should do a better job of addressing concerns directly to the customer, not on an anonymous message board... That's why IB has it's own message board as well. When they saw how much interest there was, they listened, and responded. They also have telephones, like any other broker. They also have online chat. They also respond to emails. In some regards (like 24x5+ availability), they do better at these things than other brokers, and in some regards, they need some work. I have no idea why some people choose to post the most mudane of issues here (and on the IB board) without first using the direct support channels, but, from my experience, it's not because IB's offerings are any more problematic than anyone else I've used. Yes, I defend IB a lot. They're not my primary broker. They're overall pretty impressive, and good people, and I have an interest in seeing them succeed. As far as the Java slander going on, as a career software developer, I have to say that it's mostly FUD, spread by people that have had bad experiences with poorly written Java apps. IMO, TWS does not fall into this category. Whether using a "compiled" development language or not, the MS .NET environment (and MFC before it) are interpretive by nature, and are blurring the compiled vs. interpretive distinction. There's nothing inherent in Java that makes it any slower for this type of application, which is mostly bottlenecked by communication and server bandwidth, not client CPU. The standalone version of TWS actually starts up (gets to the login window) faster than Hammer over VPN, not that a couple of seconds at startup could be the least bit important (at least to me) for an app that I use all day.