|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2722.2800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If Equis suggested you to get "a new printer, because the
printer(read: driver) is not<BR>sufficient for its MetaStock program",
than:<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> 1. This suggestion can be considdered RUDE and INPROPER
if the devices used are still</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> current, especially if
they are also still used by 3/4 of the world's PC+Printer users.<BR> 2.
MetaStock to be the program to be dumped, because it does not maintain
a<BR> -"downside compatabillity"
with its previous programs versions- policy.<BR> 3. Eg: and for
commercial businesses (and home-users) plain not acceptable!.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> 4. But also do not think that Equis is, was and will be
that blund or has intensions to (be blund).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>-<STRONG>Downside
Compatability</STRONG></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Since the HPLJ4 series printers are still current (much like
my HPDJ6 series printer), and widely</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>used in enterprisess+small businesses+at home and around the
globe, I therefore </FONT><FONT size=2>cannot and will</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>not believe Equis to have been that RUDE, eg or to be that
RUDE at all. An advice "to get the latest</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>available printer driver" is very well to be suggested
here tho (and would </FONT><FONT size=2>be of great help if one</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-ugraded- version shoul have existed/exists).<BR>Also the
fact that hardware manufacturers, by law, are to keep spare parts in store for
min. 10 years,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>after a products' first commercial re-lease date, implies that
their (Equis) final products will be used</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>for at least 5+ years, eg for more than 5 years after the
first release date of your HP LJ4m Printer.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Most enterprises and small business use an "age range" for
purchased products of 5 to 10 yrs (see</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>the "Age" further below). So for software-manufacturers
this implies that their programs/applications</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>should also be "developed+written" for a period within the 5 -
10 years range, eg</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>be "downside compliant" </FONT><FONT size=2>with+within these
"min. 5 - max 10" years for period "lasting" products.
<BR>
<BR>-<STRONG>Win98<BR></STRONG>It never harms you to upgrade from Win95 to
Win98. Tho, for your LJ4M-Printer as well as for my own</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>DJ690c-Printer, there are no newer drivers available, other
then the drivers that came with these</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Printer's software packages (on Packages disks/on the internet
site and this is apart from some</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>languages upgrades), eg both our latest printer drivers are
equiped to run in both the Win95 and</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>in Win98 operating systems' environments and consequently,
without any troubles.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-<STRONG>Age<BR></STRONG>Your Printer is 2 yrs old, mine is 3
yrs old. Usualy in software programs that can be 'dated', however</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>not for hardware, eg Printers or their drivers.<BR>Many (6
yrs) old HP DeskJet Printers (5-series and 6++ series) and HP LaserJet
Printers<BR>(3plus, 4-series and 4plus-series) around the globe are still
functioning perfectly under the Win95,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Win98 and NT4(SP6b) OS's.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-<STRONG>My Printer Settings<BR></STRONG>My DJ v9.0 is the
driver that came with my DJ-printer software package(3 disks), eg it is
not</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>a HP DJ-driver that was/is included on the Microsoft Win
OS-CdRoms(95 or 98).<BR>In the Win95-Setup, I did never choose for any
printer driver to be installed in the first place, as</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>this was also mentioned (not to do) in the ReadME.txt file
(that is found on the 1st of the 3x</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>HP DJv9.0-</FONT><FONT size=2>software disks).<BR>I had to
install this driver separatly, AND after(!) the Win OS-Setup was fully completed
and from</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>its own -HP DJ-Setup program- that is on one of the
above mentioned "3x HP-software disks".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-<STRONG>Preview window<BR></STRONG>I cannot here replicate
the problems in/with the WYSIWYG Preview-window that you+others have
found</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>to </FONT><FONT size=2>exist on your PC's (viewing all
indicators in the my "preview" works great), </FONT><FONT size=2>however, and
like mentioned</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>before, in my Printer's configuartion file, eg the HPCONFIG
file:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><BR> 1. I have the <STRONG>BI-Directional
</STRONG>printing option setting(s) switched to OFF, as
is<BR> instructed in the ReadME.txt when a
printer gives spool-queing problems when<BR>
printing (cause #1:<BR> because of
(mis)-communication (BI-directional is information exchange back
and<BR> forth between PC and
Printer)).<BR> 2. Also the printer driver is configured(set)
to <STRONG>RAW </STRONG>printing.<BR> 3. The printer's LPT
port, in the (AWARD) BIOS, was changed
to:<BR>
<STRONG>INTEGRATED
PERIPHERALS</STRONG><BR>
-Onboard Parallel Port : 378/IRQ7
<BR> -Onboard
Parallel Mode :
ECP/EPP<BR>
-ECP Mode Use DMA :
3<BR>
-Parallel Port EPP Type : EPP1.9<BR> 4. Finaly, and after
changing the BIOS settings (above), in the Windows' CONTROL
PANEL<BR> I also had to delete the standard
"Printer port(LPT1)" device and replaced it
with<BR> the "ECP-Printer port(LPT1)", eg
via the "ControlPanel/ADD-Install New
Hardware/Manualy".<BR>
<STRONG>ECP-Printer Port(LPT1)</STRONG><BR>
-Device driver : Uses the standard "LPT.vxd" for
driver(C:\Windows\System)<BR>
-Sources : Direct memory accessability
:
03<BR>
Input/output
range
: 0378 -
037F<BR>
Input/output
range
: 0778 -
077A<BR>
Interrupt-request
:
07<BR>
Settings based on :
Base-configuration 0002 (="greyed
out")<BR>
Change settings : Automatically use settings (=
"checked")</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>-<STRONG>Comments to My Printer
Settings<BR></STRONG>These BIOS-Printer settings above where advised to me by
the IOMEGA's ZIP-drive Support Dep.,</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>eg since my zip-drive is (in a "loop chain")
connected to the LPT port, and </FONT></FONT><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>is
also the first, out of</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>the 2 devices, connected (other one is the HP
printer) to the LTP-outlet port, eg my HP Printer is</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>connected to the </FONT></FONT><FONT size=2><FONT
size=2>IomegaZip and the IomegaZip is on its turn is connected to my
PC.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>BI-Directional (mis) communication between PC and
Printer was many odd times (interrupted the</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>wrong way) blocking the access to the Zip-drive,
therefore also blocking the Printer printing its</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>print-tasks </FONT></FONT><FONT size=2><FONT
size=2>and finally having Windows to return error messages or completely to
crash.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>All-in-all, with no succesfull printing for
results. Changing these settings above resulted in a never</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>"Printer-taffic-jammed-access" to both the
Zip-diks and the Printer prints and has been serving me</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>well in/for the past 2+
years.<BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>(BEFORE changing BIOS settings, print the BIOS
sub-pharagraph, eg hit the PRINTSCREEN-button,<BR>to make a printed "backup" of
your original sub-paragraph settings, should this change<BR>of settings be not
of your liking/rejected by PC).</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV></FONT><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Regards,<BR>Ton Maas<BR><A
href="mailto:ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A><BR>Dismiss the
".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying and<BR>note the new address
change. Also for my Homepage<BR><A
href="http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas";>http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas</A></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sat Nov 27 16:49:07 1999
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29858
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 27 Nov 1999 13:11:24 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA21034
for metastock-outgoing; Sat, 27 Nov 1999 12:29:41 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21031
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 27 Nov 1999 12:29:38 -0700
Received: from neptun.sns-felb.debis.de (neptun.sns-felb.debis.de [53.122.101.2])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA25162
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 27 Nov 1999 12:36:21 -0700 (MST)
Received: by neptun.sns-felb.debis.de; id UAA10532; Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:22:31 +0100
Received: from unknown(53.47.15.3) by neptun.sns-felb.debis.de via smap (V5.0)
id xma010530; Sat, 27 Nov 99 20:22:30 +0100
Received: from primus (dsh-gate.dsh.de [53.122.34.64])
by dshmail.dsh.de (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA24824
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:21:03 +0100 (MET)
From: "Andreas Grau" <agrau@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Relative Strenght Index vs. Dynamic Momentum Index
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:20:03 +0100
Message-ID: <000401bf390c$680aeb00$79d7343e@xxxxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3612.1700
Importance: Normal
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
Hello World \n
>From the Metastock help file:
"The DMI is identical to Welles Wilder’s RSI except the number of
periods is variable rather than fixed. The variability of the time
periods used in the DMI is controlled by the recent volatility of prices."
This variability makes perfect sense to me. But what do the experts say?
Any comments would be highly appreciated.
Greetings,
Andreas
---
Andreas Grau aka agrau@xxxxxxxxx
Telefon 089-27349990
Reality is an illusion -- perception is what counts
|