Dennis, are do you know how their FOREX data are? I remember they were
pretty atrocious when I used them a long time ago.

CJ

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dennis Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> 
> I just switched to the eSignal data only version.  My price is half  
> of what I was paying for their basic service.  The only difference in  
> data is no Philadelphia index data.
> 
> Dennis
> 
> On Apr 11, 2007, at 5:51 PM, Tomasz Janeczko wrote:
> 
> > There will be cheaper "data-only" feed from eSignal available  
> > within one month time.
> > Also IQFeed is the cheaper alternative.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Tomasz Janeczko
> > amibroker.com
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "murthysuresh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 4:05 AM
> > Subject: [amibroker] esignal vs equis
> >
> >
> >> With Esignal raising thier rates and scrapping the basic version,  
> >> I am
> >> reviewing other vendors including Equis. I belive that we can get  
> >> equis
> >> in metastock format with 500 symbols. Have any one used it with
> >> amibroker. How good is it?
> >>
> >> Appreciate feedback.
> >>
> >> Seede
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
> >>
> >> To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
> >> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> >>
> >> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> >> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> >>
> >> For other support material please check also:
> >> http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
> >>
> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
> >
> > To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
> > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> >
> > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> >
> > For other support material please check also:
> > http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>


Reply via email to