On Thursday, June 24, 2004, at 12:15 PM, Randolph Peters wrote:
I just got an email from MakeMusic that is one of those good news/bad news kind of deals (see below). The good news is that FinMac 2004c restores EPS export and will be available very soon to the general public.
That's great...
The bad news is that any other fixes are to be left for Finale 2005.
but that, frankly, sucks.
Before I go ballistic, I thought I would check with the cooler heads in this forum. Do we have a right to expect fixes for the 2004 versions before coughing up any more money?
I've already posted (see <http://tinyurl.com/3fl6a> and <http://tinyurl.com/2w7zs>) about this very thing.
My thinking is this: 1) FinMac 2004 for system 9 is unusable. Period.
FinMac 2004 for system 9 should never have existed. OS9 is now an antiquated excuse for a modern operating system, and it appalls me that MakeMusic! spent so much effort creating a piece of software to run on it while they've got an OSX version so full of holes.
2) FinMac 2004 (a, b, AND c) for OS X is slow and gets slower the longer you use it. Nudging items with the arrow key used to be the fastest way to adjust slurs, expressions and articulations. Now you have to wait and wait. And there are those bugs with multiple files opened which have been well documented here. I could go on...
Agreed. However, every one of those things is preventable or still usable with enough care and/or patience. (NB: I am not saying that this degree of care and patience should be required to use a notation program.)
I really think that FinMac 2003 is a more productive tool than 2004 despite the so-called improvements.
Here's where we disagree. I love FinMac2k4 despite its current failings. However, I'm not willing to pay for a brand new version when the one I've got still has so many of those failings.
I'd rather give charity to MakeMusic to keep them alive then to pretend that Finale 2004 was worth the money. How do we know that Finale 2005 will be worth paying for if they can't even fix the biggest problems in 2004?
I agree again. Who in their right mind ever expects anyone to pay for an upgrade to software they just received FIVE MONTHS AGO?
Speed and reliability are the top priorities. Any other new features are secondary concerns. If secondary features violates the first principle then they need to be changed.
Yes. Speed and reliability should be fixed in 2k4 before 2k5 is even started (though, unfortunately, it seems that it already has).
Finale 2004 may work with OS X, but it does so in a way that is unreliable and slows our productivity way down.
Not necessarily - have you spent time with the new expression placement?
I really think we deserve better before paying for what could be another experience in frustration.
But yes, I agree here.
[snip]The one reoccurring issue we heard from you was an annoyance with the Font Warning dialog's persistent appearance.
we will not be addressing this concern for 2004c, but we plan to have a solution for Finale 2005.
What in the world is that? "The one thing you really asked about, and about which I agreed with you in personal responses to your support email, we've decided not to address."
Basically, Randolph, I agree that it is unreasonable to introduce a FinMac2k5 this early (I'll say it again - merely FIVE MONTHS after receiving FinMac2k4), but I don't share quite as negative an opinion about the usefulness of the current version. Sure, there are some problems, but ultimately not insurmountable ones. It's an immature piece of software which should be further developed and matured before it is replaced.
-- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://augmentedfourth.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
