does every version have to be "innovative"? hm, innovative means "new" apparently. how much more "new" shit do you think can really be crammed into a mature notation programme today without first vastly improving the frame all this stuff you want needs to carry it?
there were some serious improvements that are well worth the money for the upgrade (i haven't yet only for reasons of system change and software i would then also have to upgrade and loss of eudora etc. etc.) -- as you point out. but in the rest of your message, you sound like someone who needs a finale water bottle ® with your upgrade or some sparkly new button that does essentially nothing new or better than the old one. sorry, not me. i have been dreaming of a ground-up makeover for years. craig, man, turn down the doomsday rhetoric and "double down" into some real facts please. :-) At 10:54 -0500 11/20/13, Craig Parmerlee wrote: >I would point out that Finale 2014 essentially >provides no real advancement in the start of the >art. It is clearly a better >implementation of the same old features than >what we had with 2011 and 2012. But there is >nothing at all innovative in this package. >That's not really a criticism. Other than some >typical bugs that I'm sure will be worked out in >due course, I really like Finale 2014 and don't >regret the upgrade at all. It "feels" better to >use. Lots of little things seem to work better, _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
