Hiro, With all due respect to you and your support of MM, there is another way of seeing this situation: By continuing to renew a subscription to Finale (and that's what it in essence has become), a user is sending to MM the following messages: 1. It's ok that you continue to release software with bugs that have potentially disastrous consequences for the users. I will condone this behavior...after all, you'll get it maybe on the second or third maintenance release. 2. I will be glad to act as a second round of beta tester for you, even though I am paying fully for the software and you are giving me nothing for my additional effort of discovering and reporting major bugs that never should have passed the first beta. Never mind that a project I need for income gets trashed or delayed. 3. I consent to and suppport with my dollars your move to a subscription model for Finale rather than an "release upgrades when warranted and when they are solid" model. I am willing to pay full yearly subscription price in order to receive some features of dubious value and a "parceled out" set of new features and bugfixes. 4. I will condone any egregious error in the program on the grounds that you are "small." and ignore the fact that a "small" company should be even quicker to respond to obvious flaws in its product than a large corporation would be. 5. I will condone and "enable" your behavior when you are in denial mode and keep silence about errors that are in plain sight. 6. Nor will I require you to post a public list of "known issues" in the interest of saving existing and potential users much time and effort Hiro, I don't think ANYONE expects totally bugless software, but there MUST exist some minimal standard to which users can hold a manufacturer.
Jim
<<winmail.dat>>
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
