On 19 Oct 2006 at 13:45, shirling & neueweise wrote: > From: "David W. Fenton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >I'm not really interested in Score per se > > then why do you keep asking questions about it?
Because you keep saying it's so much better than Finale. > > -- I'm interested in why you're going on a campaign denigrating > >Finale in favor of Score > > call it a campaign if you want, that's not how i see it. there are > things to denigrate in finale that affect my work in a negative way. i > have also clearly stated that i am aware of score's limitations, but > that i find there are some interesting things about the programme. > your needs are very different than mine, of course you may disagree > with anything i say about the programme, which doesn't mean i'm wrong, > in any absolute sense. Score solves a very limited set of very well in terms of quality of output. But it requires the use of a very limiting UI model in order to do so. > >when you don't seem to know a whole lot more about it than I do. > > it seems to me i've answered a number of questions you had about the > programme, perhaps not entirely to your satisfaction, but your > satisfaction isn't my interest here. i stated right from the start > that i spent only a little time with the programme; clearly my > knowledge of score is not at the same level as my knowledge of finale. > > i also don't feel i have anything to prove regarding my level of > knowledge of the programme in relation to yours. That's not the point. There are many elements of Score that are clearly substandard for a modern publishing application. I'm just pointing those out in response to what looks to me like a rose- colored-glasses view of Score. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
