Gotta disagree with you on your assessment of CyberX 1.6. There were some definite improvements made.
Many more options, UI improvements, etc. Perfect? Far from it. Better than 1.5? I think yes.
I think the direction CyberCorp should go to attract more business (not just customers, but other business
interests) would be to acknowledge that what they have is more of an trade execution "engine." They should
create software, e.g. an NT service or other such server component (i.e. a DLL with no user interface),
and then license their APIs to that server software so that software developers can create their own user
interfaces which use their execution engine.
The model would be similar to Quote.com and QFeed. You can use QCharts to view data, or, you can obtain a
license from Lycos, under non-disclosure, to write your own client-side software to display their server-side data.
CyberCorp seems stuck on reserving the right to do all the client-side software development in-house and
that is a mistake IMHO. There are many engineers out there who would jump at the chance to write
better trading platforms for Cyber's execution engine. They don't realize that it makes no difference who
writes the client-side software, as long as it's better, faster, more stabile, and sports features that
they haven't even considered yet. As long as it uses their brokerage engine, why should they care much
about who authored the client software?
It's a better business model because it asks the world to participate in the innovation of their core business
while retaining exclusively the proceeds to that core business (commissions!)
My 2.5 cents.
WB |
