On 2013-02-21 15:33, Steve Parker wrote: > Can you explain more the direction you're thinking?
Just some examples: * Some Finale users thought Sibelius 7 was a good choice just because it now had an input mode where the duration/pitch entry sequence was reversed. Why should such things even be a matter at all for mature products that have been on the market for a while? Almost every user judgement about ANY music notation product is based on the entry method. IMO, this shows that music notation programs have not yet matured beyond the "first generation". * Finale/Sib/Igor/etc/etc defines music notation as staves and series of measures going from left to the right in a certain fixed pattern. That is NOT what music notation is. What we now are experiencing is that computer programs define what music notation is to the human, instead of the other way around. * Igor had a nice option of selecting accidental style between Viennese school and old style method. But why would Igor decide the rules, why couldn't the user define the rules? Best regards, Jari Williamsson _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
