They're prettier too ;)
Anyway, you may not need it at the time of purchase but, who knows if you do
and since such an investment spans at least 2 years, it seems smarter to
plan for the possibility. Why be limited when you can be flexible?

_AJ


> From: "David W. Fenton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:04:54 -0400
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] OT: Mac Pro unveiled
> 
> On 8 Aug 2006 at 18:49, AJ Azure wrote:
> 
>> No one is mentioning this but, I can make it much simpler for you all.
>> MACS are better. One reason? The new platform runs OSX AND WinXP. PCs
>> can't do that yet right? If you need dual platform for work and/or you
>> may want software that one or the other does not run. MACS are the
>> only answer.
> 
> But if you don't need either of those things, your first statement IS
> FALSE. Macs are only better if you have those needs. If you don't,
> they aren't.
> 
> -- 
> David W. Fenton                    http://dfenton.com
> David Fenton Associates       http://dfenton.com/DFA/
> 
>


_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to