On 12 Aug 2006 at 7:27, dhbailey wrote: > MakeMusic introduces a new feature which isn't quite as right as it > could be. Next year, it's an old feature and we know they aren't great > at improving old features, preferring to pack in new features. Five > years/versions later, that once-new feature hasn't been improved. > > Now that's true with some things, but definitely not true with others, > so it isn't quite a fair depiction of things. > > But it certainly does seem accurate some times, even with major > features which aren't licensed from others.
I think there's a difference now, and that's Sibelius. Surely Sibelius's programmers will be looking closely at Finale's implementation of linked parts and doing their best to replicate the things that Finale does that Sibelius doesn't. That will serve to keep MM's feet to the fire on this feature. The improvements to HP seem to me to make it more like Sibelius's implementation of expression interpretation, though HP seems to me to be better than Sibelius in generating better playback. That's a feature that was introduced only a couple of versions ago and continues to be improved. Indeed, the improvements give user control of how HP interprets things, which is one of the drawbacks that was noted on this list when we talked about HP (it was certainly the main thing about HP that bothered me). I don't mean to minimize the number of features that seem to have been orphaned in terms of ongoing care and feeding, but at least one of the last major upgrades to Finale seems to be getting regular attention and improvement. -- 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
