why in the world would you try to trademark the term "open source"? you can get all technical with licenses and stuff, but to 99% of the world, open source means free.
Silly rabbit. The TZ open source is definitely free of charge. Candidate members get access to all the source code of the entire platform during the trial period. They can keep and/or do what they please with it according to the LGPL whether they get approved for full membership or not. Technically, though OSI would say this doesn't fit their narrow definition of "open source" because TZ definitely discriminates on who gets access to the source code. None of this applies to the engine component which definitely is commercial source and costs money. Edit: Maybe I confused it earlier saying TZ is commercial source. But I think I was clear that it's a combo package. Part open and part commercial. Of course, if you are picky about the definitions of open source vs. free source. Then TZ is a combo of "free source" and commercial source. I'm done discussing licenses and arguing terms. It's simple. Accepted applicants get the source code to the platform and a binary copy of the engine, access to the wiki, forums, plus free support and assistance for 2 weeks. After that we make a final decision if they qualify to join as a full member. Call it whatever you wish. Sincerely, Wayne
Not true. The GPL and LGPL, versions 2 & 3 of each, are OSD compliant licenses. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical Also not true. The "L" in LGPL has always stood for "Lesser." The GNU Library Public License was superseded by the LGPL in 1999. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html The fact of the matter is that there's no benefit to anyone, much less the open source community, by you using the LGPL for a portion of your project when it's useless without the closed source engine.
Thanks. I stand corrected except on it being useless to "anyone". People are "using" it right now both to live trade and develop strategies Which by definition makes it "useful". Still, the benefits are entirely in the favor of paying members but definitely not the open source community or anyone else outside of the group. There are parts of the open source TZ which are highly valuable even without the engine however none of will likely disclose that publicly what they are. All of that is "for eyes only". TZ is definitely not trying to promote or further the open source community or humanity in general. It's not a charity. It's 100% focused on helping paying members profit more from the market while spending less of their time through automation and faster testing of strategies and portfolios. But TZ must publicly state that it has open source since that's a HUGE benefit to potential members. They all unanimously love the arrangement because they have the freedom to innovate (some have). They also have the freedom to study the code and/or debug their strategies faster by stepping through pertinent code. Additionally, they have the luxury (our main reason of opening the source) to fix a defect or add an enhancement themselves or pay a programmer to do so if it's too far down our list of priorities. Several members have done that. So, this only "harms" all those people who expect to get something for nothing. And to those people I apologize, sincerely. I truly wish it were possible to make it free to everyone. But the situation with competition in the markets and economic realities make that impossible. Anyway, there's plenty of other truly open source and free of charge trading systems. Let everyone go use those, if they wish. Sincerely, Wayne
Apparently. However, that was not at all how you first presented TickZOOM to everyone: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2212540&highlight=tickzoom#post2212540 Hmm, guess you forgot all about the second #12 in the project description as well as the pricing and licensing in the project roadmap: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2221844&highlight=tickzoom#post2221844 It's understandable that circumstances can make one have to modify their original plans somewhat, but you've done a complete 180. As much as I'd like to think it was a simple case of extreme naivete, the lack of a rational apology as well as use of multiple aliases (at least the ones I know about; "greaterreturn," "chaostheory" and the one that I'm replying to, "tickzoom") sure make it seem like you came here with the intent to mislead from the very start. So, forgive me if I reserve my wish for good luck to those who've become TickZOOM "members," my guess is that they're going to need it.
I sort of smelled "scam" at the beginning of this thread but after a little consideration I'm revising my thinking. In industry, there is lots of retail software that comes with complete documentation and there are highly specialized packages that typically don't come with very good documentation and the expectation is that the end user will have to work with the company that provides the software a lot. Most of us never get exposed to the latter variety unless we are doing Aerospace project budgeting or something like that... I guess Tickzoom is fitting into the latter category. If I get to where I need to have such software [not likely but hey...] I'd put down some money and check it out, having all the source code could ensure that I could have somebody go through it line by line and see what all it's doing, strip out stuff I won't use, make sure there is no spyware, etc...
Except, in this case, you don't get all of the source code. You get some of the source code. I think Wayne had told me the price for all of the source code was around $16,000.
I don't think its a scam really, just underhanded sales-tactics. You get a demo (if you get it) and then you can decide if you want it. The use of a forum alias to praise the product certainly leaves a bad taste. I got interested because of the access to the source and the use of C# (that's what i know, so would be a fit). The owner offered me a license, pending the approval of the existing customers. That immediately turned me off, i don't need nor want anyone's approval. Furthermore, at the moment its a feature-incomplete beta without documentation to speak of, with a relatively large upfront payment (+ ongoing fees) and the promise of later delivery of essential features. Not my idea of a fair deal. If it was a battle-proven product with several working installations these prices might be justified (or not), but for my taste all this is rather premature. But it appears there are enough people to buy into this right now at the beta-stage.
Yeah, it's not a scam exactly, just some guy who doesn't seem particularly trustworthy (Said one thing, did another. Used multiple aliases to shill. Changes his mind frequently. Says he's not going to respond to this thread only to do so seconds later...repeatedly.) The guy just wants to get rich quick like the next Joe. Nothing wrong with that per se. Either he's knowingly far overstating the features and uniqueness of his software deliberately to sucker in some people with more money than brains or he's genuinely self-deluded himself that he has developed something unique and valuable to the tune of $16,000. Either way, he keeps trying to conjure up an illusion of 'exclusivity' by repeatedly talking about all the people he's turned down for membership. If he's so over-subscribed there wouldn't be a need to keep coming here to promote his product. He's got one thing right though, the continuation of this thread is free publicity for him and I'm sure more than a few people have probably had their curiousity piqued enough to check out his product as a result of this thread. That's a potential $16,000 each. I should get some commission.