On 10 Aug 2007 at 6:43, dhbailey wrote:

> David W. Fenton wrote:
> > On 9 Aug 2007 at 20:27, Horace Brock wrote:
> > 
> >> They also
> >> said that eventually they plan to make Simple Entry so easy and
> >> powerful that they can phase out Speedy altogether. Especially
> >> since you can also use a MIDI keyboard in Simple.
> > 
> > If they do that there won't be any reason to *not* move to Sibelius!
> 
> This indeed is very disturbing news -- why a company would take a
> (until recently) perfectly good working tool in an application, one
> which many people have grown to depend upon, and which even the
> company used to tout as the preferred tool for anything other than
> novice or very casual users, and then intentionally phase it out
> escapes my ability to understand.

When you put it that way, my answer is:

MICROSOFT

They do that all the time. You learn not to trust them when they say 
"this is the next technology and you need to switch to it right now!"

But the Finale programmers have never really worked that way. I think 
they can just leave Speedy alone, as is, and not do anything to it, 
the way they do with all sorts of other parts of Finale that are 
basically unchanged over half a dozen or more versions.

> But that does explain why they haven't jumped to fix that 9-key 
> enharmonic flip bug.

It could be that it's a very hard problem to solve. I would expect it 
would be, given that it was caused by adding two different 
presentation layers for the same data (i.e., score vs. parts), each 
of which allowed different transpositions and note spellings.

> It seems as if MakeMusic has been taken over by employees whose mantra
> is "Let's find every possible method we can to drive our long-time
> users over to Sibelius.  And by making a less serious effort in the
> educational marketplace so that Sibelius completely takes that over,
> we can finally get rid of the nuisance called Finale and concentrate
> on our first-love, SmartMusic."

It may seem like that, but I strongly doubt that's what's going on.

Software programming at this level of complexity is hard enough, but 
when you're having to upgrade legacy code parts of which are 20 years 
old, it's much, much harder still.

-- 
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