On 11 Oct 2006 at 13:00, Eric Dannewitz wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > On 11 Oct 2006 at 10:07, Eric Dannewitz wrote: > > > > > >> Phil Daley wrote: > >> > >>> At 10/11/2006 12:38 PM, dc wrote: > >>> > >>>> It simply isn't possible to proof hundreds and hundreds of files > >>>> each time > >>> > >>>> you upgrade. So what this means is that you have to keep all old > >>>> versions > >>> > >>>> of Finale and use for each file the version in was created in. > >>>> This is possible, albeit very tedious, for Windows users. But > >>>> what are Mac users supposed to do, who can't run old versions on > >>>> new machines? > >>> > >>> Backwards compatibility? Who needs that? > >>> > >>> Mac users certainly don't. > >>> > >>> Did I mention that I ran Windows Finale V3.7 on Vista? Runs > >>> perfectly . . . > >>> > >> Good for you. You go run your DOS programs and all and have > >> yourself a merry old time. > >> > > > > While I don't see much utility in his having posted this jab at Mac > > users, he is correct to observer that Windows users are fortunate to > > have the ability to be able to run all past versions of Finale, and > > that this is not likely to change with the upcoming new version of > > Windows, a major upgrade. > > > > It's true. > > > > Maybe Mac users don't like being reminded of it, and maybe it's rude > > to do so, but that doesn't change the fact of the huge differences > > between Mac and Windows in regard to backward compatibility. The > > importance of this should be obvious given the context, i.e., a > > discussion of the newest version of Finale's problems upgrading > > older files. > > > > Again, I don't see the point of repeatedly bringing it up, but the > > fact is, there is truth in the point Phil makes. > > No, Mac users don't care. We go forward, not back.
*You* may not, but it seems that other Mac users on this list *do* care, because they have just posted that they keep old OS9 Macs around to run old versions of Finale. And now they'll need to keep PowerPC Macs for the versions between OS9 and the universal binary. As long as Finale doesn't correctly upgrade older files in newer versions, there will be a need to run older versions of Finale. On Windows, there's presently no limit to running any older version of Finale on any newer version of Windows, and that seems likely to continue at least through the next version of Windows. > I think the whole idea of running DOS or Windows 3.1 programs in > Vista a bunch of Bekakt ;-) I have one Win3.x program that I need to be able to maintain and so I want all versions of Windows to continue to support 16-bit Windows applications. It may not matter to *you*, but for many Windows users, it *does* matter. The client who didn't have to pay for upgrading their application saved a lot of money because of the backward compatibility that Windows offers. -- 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
