On 21 Oct 2009 at 12:35, Howey, Henry wrote: > The central fact remains - those who adopt early are beta-testers - > unpaid beta-testers. This is fundamentally dishonest.
A few points: 1. I know of no paid bet testers for any software. 2. Bugs don't define software as "beta" because all software ships with bugs. 3. you can bet that there is only very seldom a bug discovered by end users that is not already known by the Finale developers. I don't recommend the original releases of Microsoft's products and they have a lot more capacity to ship software with no significant bugs than MM does. Certainly, over time Finale seems to be getting worse in regard to number of new bugs in new releases and the count of old bugs that don't seem to get stamped out. But that's incremental change, not a wholesale difference. As to the charge of dishonesty, I just don't see how you can make such remarks. You are alleging company-wide bad faith. It might very well be that the marketing folks are to blame for pushing a release out the door before it's ready, but you can bet that the programmers are not happy when that happens. I also don't see what you think you accomplish by alleging dishonesty. It's not going to get one line of Finale code fixed. It's not going to get one feature added, or one bug stomped out. It *does*, perhaps, make you feel good, and perhaps I should just read it not as a factual assertion about reality, but as evidence of your state of mind. That is, perhaps, valid information for the Finale developers, i.e., to know that long-term users are annoyed, but it's expressed in a way that seems to me guaranteed to lose any sympathy from those who can actually fix the problems. -- 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
