Grover, My desire for a beginners, intermediate and advanced user guides, is to put the information in a format that will allow a clear development arc for users. Right now what we have are disparate sources of information, offered in non-heirarchical structure. I kind of have a sense that I am missing the potential of AmiBroker in a way... but I'm not quite sure what I'm missing because I haven't seen it yet!!!
Hopefully Howard can cover some of these angles, or further & easier contributions to the UKB can help. However, your suggestion is an excellent one. I've just done a few google searches and I've found articles and information that I probably wouldn't have seen before. --- In [email protected], "Grover Yowell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm with you Herman. > > > > As to the many comments about it is hard to find the information you want > even though it is there (somewhere), I agree. But now that I have re- > discovered the Google site search feature and using that can find almost > anything with a one line entry on the internet. In the Google toolbar the > search is : whatIwant site:www.amibroker.com > > > > So I am wondering if 90% of the problem of needing a new Help manual would > be solved by simply making available a convenient Google site search line on > the AMIbroker Home page. It has sure worked for me. I have been able to > find things in the UKB or the KB that I knew were there but couldn't find at > a later time. > > > > Sometimes it is better to solve a part of the problem that is easy rather > than the whole thing. > > > > Just a thought, > > > > Grover > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Herman > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 2:49 AM > To: George Loyd > Subject: Re[2]: [amibroker] Help Manual -> UKB > > > > I agree 100%. > > > > If anybody really wants a glossary he/she can have it published tomorrow on > the UKB. Tomasz created the UKB for this type of use and he already gave > permission to draw on existing AB Help content if used on that site. Don't > underestimate the value of this. It means that you already have 95% of the > work, structure and content, done for you by Tomasz. I have no idea what all > the fuss is about. I can further clear copyright issues with him if you want > to go this route. > > > > The UKB comment field's can be used to add notes, code snippets, references, > etc. Volunteers can screen, polish, and add this to the main item to make it > look nice - with minimal effort. The tools are there and they are already > supported by AmiBroker. Just dump the whole thing in one post from Word > (minimal formatting) on the UKB (contact me for details) and the search > engine will find the required item. The UKB will have more permanence than > any other private site. > > > > I think 90% of all the talk in this thread is due to a desire to try some > new layouts and try a new glossy user interface. All that won't add any > value to the contents of the site; it only adds lots of work to set it up > and maintain. > > > > If you want something done, simply do it. > > > > Best regards, > > herman > > > > > > > > > > Sunday, August 31, 2008, 12:58:43 AM, you wrote: > > > > > > > > I don't reply to many emails - in fact VERY few, but this one and many of > the replies forced me to write something. > > > > Maybe AmiBroker should be more like MetaStock where errors remain for many > upgrade cycles ( ie months to a year or more) and NO BETA upgrades ever > occur. In the 6 1/2 years I have used AmiBroker Tomasz has provided > literally far more than 100 beta versions - FREE of charge, often fixing > bugs within a few hours to a couple of days. No other investment software > that I know of does this that fast. MetaStock's Enhance Backtester or > Optimizer still has included errors in its handling of returns - which in my > opinion renders it less than useful for "real" investment work where money > is on the line. Enlighten me if I am wrong. Each "one tenth" upgrade for > MetaStock costs $99 or more while Tomasz was providing 5 "one tenth" > upgrades and MANY betas FREE for about the same price. Checking MetaStock's > manual - AmiBroker's is superior. Now I realize this is a comparison with > only one other available software package, but others will fail to generate > much improved comparisons. I think I would rather still have what AmiBroker > provides. > > > > Furthermore Tomasz is a virtual Help file to this message board, although I > think he would rather be programing new features for AmiBroker than > answering questions here. > > > > Each investment software package has their own programming language. As new > features and functions are included into the language, it becomes more > difficult to use and understand. The added complexity generates more > questions. No other investment software package has generated much in the > way of third party reference texts, other the few Tradestation has. Howard > Bandy's book is the first of several I foresee for AmiBroker. > > > > Tomasz has been chided for "for failing to provide a 5.1 Manual yet" - geez > give the man a chance - he will get it out ASAP. You can't have everything > at once - new features are better than a new Manual the day the upgrade > comes out. People here on the message board will help your understanding of > new features if the Readme file and examples doesn't clear up the problems. > > > > What other investment software package has been created and maintained by > one man that rivals the functionality of AmiBroker? AmiBroker is evolving > faster than any other package I am familiar with - or am I just wearing > "rose-colored" glasses? > > > > I could write more but I think I have made my opinion clear. Yes I want > more, but I can be patient - it WILL come. > > > > Regards, > > George Loyd > > > > > > > > brian_z111 wrote: > > > > There are far too many Help Manual questions posted in this forum. > > > > This takes up our valueable time answering questions that should have > > been answered by AmiBroker. > > > > In fact they waste far more time than OT posts. > > > > Our precious time would be far better spent answering more interesting > > questions. > > > > Some of the features in AB aren't explained in the manual, some things > > are out of date and sometimes the explanations are a bit cryptic. > > > > Example: > > > > Prettify was added to the Formula Editor in beta version 5.04 > > - included in devlog under version 5.05 Feb08 > > - official release v5.10 in June08 which includes manual 5.10 > > > > Ami website PDF manual is still version 5.00 > > > > - Search PDF for prettify == nothing > > - Search AB manual version 5.1 for prettify == nothing > > - Use AB site search engine == nothing > > - Google amibroker.com == 3 hits from devlog > > - devlog records release but has no info about it and no explanation in > > the read me > > - searched KB == nothing > > - searched UKB == nothing > > > > The screenshot of the FE edit dropdown menu, in the Help Manual is out > > of date (at least it looks different to my version 5.10) > > > > http://www.amibroke <http://www.amibroker.com/guide/w_afledit.html> > r.com/guide/ <http://www.amibroker.com/guide/w_afledit.html> w_afledit. > <http://www.amibroker.com/guide/w_afledit.html> html > <http://www.amibroker.com/guide/w_afledit.html> > > > > The Devlog just says that the Prettify function was added ... looked in > > the AFL function list and couldn't find anything... is it a function or > > a function()? > > > > New features should be explained in the official help manual that comes > > out immediately after the beta inclusion. > > We should not have to search elsewhere but even if we do we, in this > > case, we still find nothing. > > > > It shouldn't be up to volunteers to explain help manual items in this > > forum, or the UKB, or anywhere else. > > > > It saves AB some effort if they don't have to keep the manual up to > > date but the effort is transferred to the volunteers, who have to > > answer it scores of times, instead of AB answering it once. > > > > If we all took the rationalist approach, that some people are > > advocating e.g. "users should have skills or lower their sights or pay > > Graham", and charged AB for the time we spend providing AB support then > > the program would cost thousands of dollars and wouldn't look so cheap, > > up against other software, afterall > > > > brian_z >
