I don't know Sibelius, so keep that in mind, but how likely is it that the Sibelius rep would conveniently ignore those things that are easier and faster in Finale? If he wants to keep his job, VERY likely.
One fellow on this list (or perhaps another) once listed (numerically) over 60 reasons why Finale was better than Sibelius. Granted, those were from his perspective but impressive nonetheless and must reading for those looking for which program to buy.
My point is, was the Sibelius demonstration impressive not so much for its content but rather that (1) they got the invitation or (2) they solicited the invitation as a result of a better push to rope in the education market (one that Coda must respond to)? Could an impressive Finale demonstration be put together, *including* similar criticisms of Sibelius that the latter had of Finale and including Finale's own one-click capabilities? Of course it could. Shame on Coda if they are lagging in this area, but to selectively pick those things Sibelius does better (esp. when it's being done by a paid Sibelius employee) while ignoring those that Finale can do better proves little.
Richard
You raise some excellent points, and no doubt this fellow (hired by the school as a result of a solicitation) WAS conveniently ignoring some Sibelius weaknesses and playing down some Finale strengths (see my previous post). But in order for Finale to come up with a comparable presentation, they have to create a better default file and an easier introduction to the program. They are getting better at these last two points (especially in 2002 and 2003) but there is considerable room for improvement.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
