NT for Linux ... ?

[Treggs]

Andrea, fair points and I agree virtualization has come a long way. I just think the price of having separate hardware is worth it as I have a fair bit of experience building machines.

Makes sense we all use what works for each of us.

Treggs, you are right but two aspects must be taken into consideration here:
1) The VM footprint is incredibly low nowadays
2) I trust the efforts of the VMware staff when putting together the "hardware" platform which is seen (virtually) by Windows as it runs in the VM, much more than i trust myself when assembling a custom PC the main reason being: it is virtually impossible to strive for perfect software-hardware compatibility without experimenting extensively.

This is why, I think, windows runs much better on VMWare fusion than on the average pc.
Ultimately windows targets a processor architecture not a hardware platform (as does MAC), when you play with the hardware platform you are embarking in an adventure. Of course if one is a geek, and loves to recompile, overclock, watercool in his spare time windows (an ultimately linux) are much better choices.

Regards.

[Andrea Fare]

For those running virtual machines on a mac, wouldn't it be better to run windows natively using bootcamp? Then you could use all your machines resources to run NT which is a definite advantage if you are backtesting.

I understand the appeal of a virtual machine being moved between machines but the same can be managed using the NT backup feature.

Treggs, you are right but two aspects must be taken into consideration here:
1) The VM footprint is incredibly low nowadays
2) I trust the efforts of the VMware staff when putting together the "hardware" platform which is seen (virtually) by Windows as it runs in the VM, much more than i trust myself when assembling a custom PC the main reason being: it is virtually impossible to strive for perfect software-hardware compatibility without experimenting extensively.

This is why, I think, windows runs much better on VMWare fusion than on the average pc.
Ultimately windows targets a processor architecture not a hardware platform (as does MAC), when you play with the hardware platform you are embarking in an adventure. Of course if one is a geek, and loves to recompile, overclock, watercool in his spare time windows (an ultimately linux) are much better choices.

Regards.

[omololu]

My Ubuntu setup is currently 9.10 dual booting on my trading box. I have been experimenting with VM's (virtual box and VMWare Workstation) and wine to get NT working. VMWare works well on a dual head Ubuntu box but three monitors and two video cards is proving to be unreliable.

On windows I use Virtual Dimension as a desktop manager and it also allows you to assign app to desktops. It's not as pretty as spaces but it works well and never crashes. There are better virtual desktop solutions for single screen windows boxes but virtual dimension works the best for me on a triple screen setup.

I have been messing with the idea of building a second machine to run Ubuntu on two monitors (allowing the nice desktop effects easily) and running this in tandem with my triple screen windows box. I would then be able to run ubuntu and windows at the same time to give me the best of both worlds. Ubuntu for my day to day tasks and windows for trading. That would allow me to offload all the extra stuff to the ubuntu box and really stream line the trading machine. The extra couple of monitors wouldn't hurt either

Thanks, for sharing this with me.

[Treggs]

Synergy/MAC OS X project is still incomplete.

MAC OS X "Spaces" has some features that makes it special or different. One of this is that MAC OS X is shipped with it. Another is that user can associate applications to a specific Space. It is also seamless is usage. See my attached screeshot.

I've used Linux (Gentoo, Suse, Fedora, etc) for years now and can conclude that it requires considerable technical knowledge to use and tweak it, unlike Windows and Mac. I've tweaked MetaTrader to work on Linux and MAC OS X, but not completely satisfactory. Linux and MAC OS X are all Unix derivatives, but MAC OS X just stands out. The only draw-back with Mac is its initial high cost and that's not favorable. Ubuntu is coming up to a good standing too. I shall appreciate it, if you will share your Ubuntu experience and setup with me.

I've installed Open Source Firefox and VLC on my Mac too, and they are OK.

I wish that NT is natively available on Mac and Linux (it seems an impossibility now).

My Ubuntu setup is currently 9.10 dual booting on my trading box. I have been experimenting with VM's (virtual box and VMWare Workstation) and wine to get NT working. VMWare works well on a dual head Ubuntu box but three monitors and two video cards is proving to be unreliable.

On windows I use Virtual Dimension as a desktop manager and it also allows you to assign app to desktops. It's not as pretty as spaces but it works well and never crashes. There are better virtual desktop solutions for single screen windows boxes but virtual dimension works the best for me on a triple screen setup.

I have been messing with the idea of building a second machine to run Ubuntu on two monitors (allowing the nice desktop effects easily) and running this in tandem with my triple screen windows box. I would then be able to run ubuntu and windows at the same time to give me the best of both worlds. Ubuntu for my day to day tasks and windows for trading. That would allow me to offload all the extra stuff to the ubuntu box and really stream line the trading machine. The extra couple of monitors wouldn't hurt either

[omololu]

Fair enough. Why not just build a dedicated windows desktop and run synergy to share your mouse and keyboard with the macbook. Best of both worlds and probably cheaper than an imac.

Spaces isn't a "special feature" in OSX. Linux has had virtual desktops for ages and I'm running virtual desktops on my windows machine. (Currently 6 virtual desktops on a triple monitor machine).

I use mainly open source software like firefox, thunderbird vlc etc so I can pretty much work from any platform. It just makes sense to run NT on a dedicated windows machine but you can see why I would like NT to work nicely on Ubuntu. I think eventually I'll run a second box with Ubuntu for all my daily tasks and connect to my current trading machine using synergy.

Synergy/MAC OS X project is still incomplete.

MAC OS X "Spaces" has some features that makes it special or different. One of this is that MAC OS X is shipped with it. Another is that user can associate applications to a specific Space. It is also seamless is usage. See my attached screeshot.

I've used Linux (Gentoo, Suse, Fedora, etc) for years now and can conclude that it requires considerable technical knowledge to use and tweak it, unlike Windows and Mac. I've tweaked MetaTrader to work on Linux and MAC OS X, but not completely satisfactory. Linux and MAC OS X are all Unix derivatives, but MAC OS X just stands out. The only draw-back with Mac is its initial high cost and that's not favorable. Ubuntu is coming up to a good standing too. I shall appreciate it, if you will share your Ubuntu experience and setup with me.

I've installed Open Source Firefox and VLC on my Mac too, and they are OK.

I wish that NT is natively available on Mac and Linux (it seems an impossibility now).

[Treggs]

Fair enough. Why not just build a dedicated windows desktop and run synergy to share your mouse and keyboard with the macbook. Best of both worlds and probably cheaper than an imac.

Spaces isn't a "special feature" in OSX. Linux has had virtual desktops for ages and I'm running virtual desktops on my windows machine. (Currently 6 virtual desktops on a triple monitor machine).

I use mainly open source software like firefox, thunderbird vlc etc so I can pretty much work from any platform. It just makes sense to run NT on a dedicated windows machine but you can see why I would like NT to work nicely on Ubuntu. I think eventually I'll run a second box with Ubuntu for all my daily tasks and connect to my current trading machine using synergy.

With VM, the Guest OS (e. g. XP + NT + all other XP related/associated tools) can be moved to another Mac machine as quickly as 3 minutes. With Bootcamp, the backup process for XP is not as fast and simple.

At present, I don't want to do Bootcamp method because I don't want to dedicate the whole MacBook Pro machine to XP. Whilst the XP + NT is running, I can use Safari or just see my incoming mails in the MAILS client tool. I can also use SPACES (a very special tool in MAC OS X) to simultaneously see four screens (XP + NT in one screen, Safari in a 2nd screen, MAILS in the 3rd screen, and my desktop containing Crude oil price, US Dollar Index, and Gold spot widgets live charts in the 4th screen). However, adequate RAM + Hard disk size is required to cope with all these.

I'll prefer to dedicate an iMac machine to an XP + NT setup using Bootcamp method, and consequently having XP completely take-over the Mac machine.

[omololu]

For those running virtual machines on a mac, wouldn't it be better to run windows natively using bootcamp? Then you could use all your machines resources to run NT which is a definite advantage if you are backtesting.

I understand the appeal of a virtual machine being moved between machines but the same can be managed using the NT backup feature.

With VM, the Guest OS (e. g. XP + NT + all other XP related/associated tools) can be moved to another Mac machine as quickly as 3 minutes. With Bootcamp, the backup process for XP is not as fast and simple.

At present, I don't want to do Bootcamp method because I don't want to dedicate the whole MacBook Pro machine to XP. Whilst the XP + NT is running, I can use Safari or just see my incoming mails in the MAILS client tool. I can also use SPACES (a very special tool in MAC OS X) to simultaneously see four screens (XP + NT in one screen, Safari in a 2nd screen, MAILS in the 3rd screen, and my desktop containing Crude oil price, US Dollar Index, and Gold spot widgets live charts in the 4th screen). However, adequate RAM + Hard disk size is required to cope with all these.

I'll prefer to dedicate an iMac machine to an XP + NT setup using Bootcamp method, and consequently having XP completely take-over the Mac machine.

[Treggs]

For those running virtual machines on a mac, wouldn't it be better to run windows natively using bootcamp? Then you could use all your machines resources to run NT which is a definite advantage if you are backtesting.

I understand the appeal of a virtual machine being moved between machines but the same can be managed using the NT backup feature.

[omololu]

to JC

I suggest you go MAC, I can confirm NT6.5 runs very well under VMWARE Fusion + XP,
I think running under a virtual machine has several other advantages, like restoring your environment after a system breakdown on a different computer in a minute.

I use this setting at work, and with only 500 megs of ram dedicated to the Vm the performance i get is on par with any dedicated Vista machine with 1gig of ram...

Andrea,

You are right.

I've had my MacBookPro 17" 4GB RAM + VMWare Fusion + XP + NT6.5 running very very smoothly for a year now. I allocate 1.5GB RAM to XP; I also have the Anvira AntiVir antivirus on the XP (just a protection for XP; no antivirus for my MAC). I've recently added a 42" LCD. I'll upgrade the Mac to 8GM RAM in December and allocate 3GB to XP. I'm current beta-testing NT7 on the same setup and it is running smoothly too (except for NT7 "beta" behaviour).

I'll stick to this Mac setup since NinjaTrader is not in the mood for a native Mac NT.

[Treggs]

R2k, I agree completely with your thoughts. I have several machines and my main desktop is a dedicated machine for trading running windows. Almost everything else I do I can do using Ubuntu so I guess I just want my cake and eat it too lol. While virtualization is a solution, I prefer to limit the extra layers of complexity. Dual booting my other hardware gives me quick backup options. I regularly save an NT backup and install it on a backup machine so I can switch computers very fast.

Hardware is dirt cheap and virtualization is much further than even 3 years ago.

I'm a Linux guy since 96' running slackware and also dabbled with Linux From Scratch, I am also a member of a few LUGs, and I won't drop names, but I can call some generals if need be.

If you are a serious trader, then get a box or two and dedicate them to NT solely. Use XPLite or the like and strip down the OS, pound it with memory and cpu, and focus on your strategy.

If your decision as to whether or not you will buy NT will be based on if it runs on Linux or Mac, then you are clearly not the market that is serious about trading. That's like saying you won't use Google because they run their servers on Linux.

IT IS ABOUT THE APPLICATION!

YOU GET THE HARDWARE FOR YOUR APPLICATION AND YOUR SOLUTION.

Now with that being said, I think a constructive thread on best setups for Linux/Mac with NT (virtulized) would be helpful and realistic.

Quickbooks still hasn't ported, so what does that tell you. They just went web based.

I'm sure trading software will go the way of the cloud as well, although I would be paranoid (even more than now, lol) about using it.

Thanks. This was not intended to offend, rather just my opinion based on real trading experience as well as a technical background in both Linux and windows. I have little experience with mac, but they went Intel, so a VM should work fine and from what I have heard, it does.

With NT7, you will really get a fast setup under VM with all their memory tweaks etc.

[Andrea Fare]

to JC

I suggest you go MAC, I can confirm NT6.5 runs very well under VMWARE Fusion + XP,
I think running under a virtual machine has several other advantages, like restoring your environment after a system breakdown on a different computer in a minute.

I use this setting at work, and with only 500 megs of ram dedicated to the Vm the performance i get is on par with any dedicated Vista machine with 1gig of ram...

[r2kTrader]

Hardware is dirt cheap and virtualization is much further than even 3 years ago.

I'm a Linux guy since 96' running slackware and also dabbled with Linux From Scratch, I am also a member of a few LUGs, and I won't drop names, but I can call some generals if need be.

If you are a serious trader, then get a box or two and dedicate them to NT solely. Use XPLite or the like and strip down the OS, pound it with memory and cpu, and focus on your strategy.

If your decision as to whether or not you will buy NT will be based on if it runs on Linux or Mac, then you are clearly not the market that is serious about trading. That's like saying you won't use Google because they run their servers on Linux.

IT IS ABOUT THE APPLICATION!

YOU GET THE HARDWARE FOR YOUR APPLICATION AND YOUR SOLUTION.

Now with that being said, I think a constructive thread on best setups for Linux/Mac with NT (virtulized) would be helpful and realistic.

Quickbooks still hasn't ported, so what does that tell you. They just went web based.

I'm sure trading software will go the way of the cloud as well, although I would be paranoid (even more than now, lol) about using it.

Thanks. This was not intended to offend, rather just my opinion based on real trading experience as well as a technical background in both Linux and windows. I have little experience with mac, but they went Intel, so a VM should work fine and from what I have heard, it does.

With NT7, you will really get a fast setup under VM with all their memory tweaks etc.

If you have to use virtualization on the mac then truthfully it doesn't work on a mac. It's simply running on windows in a virtual machine.

Any windows binary will run on windows within a virtual machine in any environment.

Here is a screenshot I have taken moments ago showing ninjatrader running on xp within a virtual machine (google Virtualbox) on linux.

The problem with virtualization is the extra load put on a system having to run windows on top of itself. This is what everyone would like to get around by having ninjatrader compiled to natively execute on which ever operating system.

[r2kTrader]

It's cheaper to just buy a PC and dedicated it to NT. Or use a virtual machine.

We, Mac people, simply deserve NT to become native on Mac... because we don't have almost any native software with capabilities even close to those of NT... do it, please!

[r2kTrader]

Wine = dead. It's choke full of bugs and then more bugs.

Use a virtual machine. NT isn't coming to Linux.

Has anyone tried running Ninjatrader using vine? http://www.winehq.org/

[Treggs]

I am just trying NT on Ubuntu 9.10 with wine (1.1.32). Each time there is a major Ubuntu release I give it another try. One day it will work .... and I'll post here if it does.