On 23 Mar 2005 at 14:51, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: > To my question: > >If one uses ~.etf as the primary storage format for Finale data > >files, one will not lose access to the data in the files. . .. > > David Fenton wrote > >How successful is the import of ETF files in these other programs? > >How usable are the programs themselves? Do they lack capabilities > >that Finale has? > > and I would note that at present I know of two programs that read > (though none that write) ~.etf files: Sibelius, and Lilypond, with > lilypond doing so through a filter that converts the ~.etf file to a > ~.ly one. But the format of the data file is just an arrangement of > the data. Since the file structure is public, there is no reason that > one could not create a new program to convert the files; this is not > possible with Sibelius, since the file strucutre is kept proprietary.
I'm not asking what is possible. I'm asking WHAT IS IN EXISTENCE right now. "What is possible" may never ever come to pass, yet you seem to be putting your money on the mere possibility. > >The problem I have with these ETF-conversion discussions is that no > >3rd parties and no conversion is necessary if MakeMusic would simply > >do something very, very simple and inexpensive, i.e., set up a key > >escrow. > > > >It's such a small thing that I can't understand why there could be > >any resistance to such a simple and inexpensive operation. I'd think > >it would also be quite a selling point in comparison to the > >competition. > > I"ve been to the MakeMusic offices, personally, a couple of years ago. > I saw a number of people in the offices, but I did not see anyone > eating drinking. And I do not make any assumption from the fact that > neither Allen Fisher, nor the other people I have had the occasion to > contact over the years have not discussed eating or drinking in > forming an opinion that they do not. By the same token, I can think > of good reasons why there might in fact be a key escrow, and why > MakeMusic would choose not to even publish the fact, much less use it > as a selling point. Given that it's hurting sales among their must loyal user base, they would be idiots to choose not to publicize it if it already existed. On another note, I'm not sure why you've chosen to revive this subject yet again. I don't see that you're adding anything new to the discussion at all, just repeating points you've attempted to make in the past. You're free to do that, but I don't see the point of doing so. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
