This was sent out a long time ago. Did he ever hear anything back from
MakeMusic about this?
shirling & neueweise wrote:
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 03:34:00 +0200
To: John Paulson Chief Executive Officer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ron Raup President <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark Dunn Chief Technology
Officer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Karen VanDerBosch Chief Financial
Officer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mary Schneider Chief Marketing
Officer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Richard Llewellyn
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Shuler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill
Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Shuler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Anne Bartsch
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "Johnson, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected]
Dear Board of Directors, Development Team, Marketing and Sales Team
of Finale (MakeMusic),
I was EXTREMELY disappointed that some MAJOR outstanding issues were
not resolved in F2008, in particular issues around linked parts. The
impression that I got (and I hope I am wrong on this) on this
particular issue was that the development team reps fielded a few
questions knowing it was a hot topic but ultimately had no plans to
do any real work on the tool, which, in my opinion, is one of the
major reasons since F2005 for existing users to upgrade. I know I am
not alone in my disappointment, as MM would be if it monitored the
Finale email list. There are many people who are really dissatisfied
with the incredibly incomplete implementation of linked parts, and
many users who seriously doubt it is even worth the effort to
upgrade, given the number of things which do not function nearly
properly (I have written at length about this).
I do also understand issues of "marketing" and the need to seek out
new buyers of Finale, but I hope the administration and marketing
teams understand that many long-term users may be in a position to
choose which company their department will purchase multiple software
licences from for the university computer / music labs they run...
and I know of people who have suggested Sibelius to new notation
programme users (I am part of this group) while remaining themselves
Finale users in some cases only because of the time they have
invested in the programme, and the time it would take to get up to
the same level of use with a new or unfamiliar programme.
I find it deplorable that I should have to even mention this as a
form of argument, but repeated requests to provide a
properly-functioning programme or to at least provide updates to fix
things between versions -- rather than forcing the user to pay for an
upgrade to get the fix, possibly touted as a "new feature" (dubious,
very dubious marketing practice) -- don't seem to work as efficiently
as one would hope. Quite honestly, the impression amongst a number of
long-term users of Finale have is that MM does not really value them
and is far more interested in "newbies"; how else can one explain how
so many significant shortcomings of the programme, shortcomings that
a novice may not even notice but which can have significant impact on
the workflow of professional users of the software? Maybe this is in
fact the case, and my entire argument is then moot...
In all honesty, I have seriously considered other options (i.e.
switching to another notation programme) more than once, and looked
seriously into moving over to Sibelius, Score, or Noteability. In
part for the reasons above (time and investment) I decided against it
in the end, but I will say that I have found that Finale nevertheless
offers -- and I have commented on this in public forums -- a far
higher level of sophistication for the higher end publication quality
(and beyond) work to be done with notation programmes than Sibelius,
and Score is simply a way of thinking that is really not enticing to
me. While you may appreciate this compliment, it can't be a great
feeling to know that part of the reason some of your most talented,
dedicated and most faithful users are still around is because they
don't have the time to invest in other options, or worse, that they
are continually forced to upgrade to keep clients who have newer
versions than they do.
There are other long-standing issues (aside from linked parts) which
the support team is aware of, and I assume these concerns have been
passed onto the development team, so I will not list them (the email
is long enough already). My concern is not so much the individual
incomplete feature development, but more the practice of abandoning
the "errors" and the arrogance of continuing to release software with
insufficiently-developed features, and expecting your clientele to
somehow be happy with paying annual fees for Finale's numerous
insufficiencies.
I sincerely hope you will take my points in all seriousness, that you
will consult the people who are buying your software, and perhaps
more importantly, the people who refuse to (continue to) buy your
software.
Kind regards,
jef chippewa
Composer, Copyist.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
