>My main point here is that in enriching the software and building more >flexibility, the quality of the dialog with the users is really quite >important.
The fact that you are available to the end user is a wonderful thing and a selling point. Some software has NO support other than a FAQ at the website. Some companies charge for support. >This is where it seems to me, in the past couple of years, a tendency >has grown to consider that small software developers like me, who do it >on the side of their real job, cannot possibly offer the same level of >quality as the big companies like Finale or Sibelius can, with their >full-time large teams of bright ivy-league graduate programmers. You are doing just fine by comparison, I think. <rant> I've heard Finale has gotten better, but IMHO Finale is a model of frustration. The most un-intuitive software I've ever used. I have to look up even the simplest tasks in one of the four manuals. You can't even drag a note. </rant> >Make no mistake, even when you are paying for a registration for either >Django or Fronimo, you are still paying a highly qualified person for >well under a nickel an hour. A lot like being a musician, when you count the hours of practice and preparation. >Well, there is another thing that keeps my going: playing with the >software to create some really bad music... You can check my latest >example of this at >http://cbsr26.ucr.edu/wlkfiles/Publications/Prelude/Prelude_orch.html - >A prelude for archlute, bandoneon, cello, bass and tinkle bells... I don't know if there is such a thing as bad music. I thought it was delightful piece, especially nice harmonies. What is a bandoneon? -- Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
