Aaron Sherber wrote:
I'm not trying to be the king of Finale, and you're welcome to say whatever you like on this topic. My point was just that when we're discussing the bugs in Finale, the fact that you haven't encountered those bugs doesn't change the fact that they're still there.
But does that mean that everyone encounters them? No. Oh, and now I can comment this topic even though your previous email said I shouldn't???
What do you mean by 'always encounter them'? Are there bugs which I can reproduce every time I try to? Yes. Are there bugs I encounter every time I use Finale? Yes.
I meant no offense to you. If Finale works fine for the things you do, great. That doesn't change the fact that it has many confirmed bugs which bite many of us on a regular basis.
Which however does not mean that the program is not useful and productive to most all of us. If you read what you guys have been saying, you get the idea that Finale 2004 is not usable at all. It is totally usable. Sure, there might be bugs, but I can't think of a single piece of software I have that does not have bugs in it. Whether or not the bugs bother me is another topic. They have NOT cropped up for me at all.
So, back on the topic of 2005. I have found 2004 to be a good product. Sure, it was late. Most all music applications that I use (Protools, MOTU Digital Performer) were late getting to OS X. Hell, PGMusic's Band in a Box software JUST came out for OS X.
When they announce an update to Finale 2005, I'll probably get it. There will be a lot of features (hopefully) that I'd find useful. Bugs? Maybe, but that computer software. Look at Mac OS X. Going to 10.3 was kind of buggy, but the features and the performance was worth it. I wouldn't go back to 10.2.8 or whatever if you paid me......
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
