Quote from ArchAngel:
If you indeed NEED all those windows open simultaneously, then screen real estate is the issue - not CPU. All of that software and all those active windows will run very comfortably on a 1GHz/1GB machine - that was the point - trading software doesn't necessitate a portable teraflop machine.
But if you really need all those windows simultaneously visible, then even a 17" 1600x1200 notebook resolution might be challenged.
However, you shouldn't presume that every trader needs all those windows - e.g., when trading the S&P you don't need L2, position and profit monitor always visible isn't a requirement, order entry window can pop up when needed (if it's not available from the charts), NEEDing an IM window active (let alone an always visible one) is by no means a given, browser windows can be popped up if you need them, not sure why you listed more than one item for charting software, an ET window (?) - that's just a browser pop it up when you need it, the email program doesn't need to be visible at all times (it'll alert you when mail arrives), not sure what W2K/WXP "system status" windows you're thinking of but can't think of any that you'd ever have to have visible.
Anyway, it's the charting and analytic functions that will place the highest demand on the CPU. Browsers are pathetically low CPU, same with all the other items you mentioned. The important consideration is that # of windows and screen real estate requirements do NOT equate to power of machine, only the size of display.
So anyway, the point was that a 12-14 pound brick wasn't essential in order to trade while on the road - you can easily power considerable charting and analytic needs with a 1GHz/1GB machine and have an ultraportable package. Different traders, different strokes.
very well said. very well said, and I don't take offense at how it was interpreted, atlthough it appears I didn't clarify myself sufficiently.
You're right, all those windows that are not directly related to trading would and do remain minimized, it was their usage in tandem that posed many a problems to the cpu. Two solutions you mentioned are correct:
1) memory size of 1GB -- which until recently this summer was cost prohibitive, if the machine could accommodate it
2) 1Ghz machines operate sufficiently fast to handle such a load, and especially if they are of the P4 variety or faster (i.e. 2.2Ghz, etc)
What is reassuring is knowing that someone else has made those very light laptops (feather weights) work well under such stress. I would never opt for a machine over 8lbs/9lbs. Those 12lbs+ machines are really teraflop'ers, as you mentioned.
Another excellent point was those who have shifted their focus over to futures (Emini trading) over their previous origins in NASD/NYSE trading, so in that sense, certainly having those associated windows open would not apply. In fact, that reminds me, that so many equity traders who have left off trading stocks primarily for the EMini's had similar comments of no longer needing the most robust machines and being so worn down from so much going on whilest trading. Pat Systems J Trader and similar applications are vastly more simplified than the superior DA platforms (direct access trading software).
My comments are totally valid when the DA platform is SLK's Redi software, which is such a hog on resources; those statements are not so critical with the more efficient platforms like CyberX, Ameritrade, Hammer or other more current and efficiently written platforms. So there is validity to my statements.
Of curious note though, which mfgr provided the 17" with 1600x1200? I would be interested in that. The largest screen size with that configuration was Sony's Vaio 16.1" and more commonly available with so many other mfgr's in the 15.4" and 15" formats. I would like to know.
