This matter stems from the same philosophy that provides us half-baked (well, maybe undercooked) yearly upgrades, but it is a separate problem. It doesn't seem to me like the two need to be lumped together. Though it would be best to have a comprehensive list of changes arrive with each upgrade, I would take that information whenever MM has a list sorted out. How difficult would it be to make a "read me" file available on the website?
To my knowledge a complete version history would be a first for MM, Coda, et al. I have personally found out about *very* useful features two to three versions (years!) down the line, from this list as well as from other users that I know and work with. Wouldn't a detailed history of everything changed, fixed, tweaked, etc. since version 2000 be helpful? I don't believe we've ever been offered anything except highlights (also know as selling points and, in some cases, marketing ploys). Don Hart on 6/5/06 9:52 AM, Scot Hanna-Weir at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 6/4/06, dhbailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It would be wonderful for ALL Finale users if there were a list of all >> the changes, in some sort of alphabetical or logical order, rather than >> the current "oh yes, and I almost forgot, we also did THIS" format of >> the current incomplete list we get with each version. >> >> Oh well, we can dream, can't we? Apparently that's all we'll get to do >> about such things, given MakeMusic's reply to your request. >> >> Too many things to possibly list them all? Give me a f#$%&ing break! >> If it's too long to possibly list them all, it would be too long for >> them to have actually programmed them all! > > Let me start by saying I completely agree with you. There, now that > I have that out of the way... =) > > I think what happens with MM, and most software developers that do > this yearly, "buy me cause I have a few new toys and a few more bugs" > update thing, is that it is such a rush to production, that while they > do have a list of what they're working on, it's probably not always > clear what is actually going to get finished by production, and that > the final list of what makes it in is probably not known to any one > person. > This is problematic...but more importantly symptomatic of this kind > of development. While it may be "better business" to release a yearly > update to rake in the revenue, for the stability and promise of the > program, I'd sincerely prefer that MM take their time, work on > specific problems that they, (and their dedicated users), want > addressed, and release the update when it is stable, ready, and > significantly improved. > I guess we can dream, David. > > -Scot _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
