I'm not going to defend MuseScore because I am not that familiar with it. I am merely a bystander watching it gradually may inroads.
But I am but surprised at the dismissive implications of calling Fin and Sib "20-year-old products". Finale 2012 is 2 years old. It would be laughable to compare it with version from 20 years ago, which I believe was still (Mac) 2.6.x. For a laugh, see if you can fire up a 20-yr-old version of Finale. (On Win it might even work.) Then you may have a better appreciation for just how much innovation has happened in the past 20 years. On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Craig Parmerlee <cr...@parmerlee.com>wrote: > On 9/17/2013 8:09 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: > >> The version of MuseScore that I tried out 2 years ago was nowhere near >> Fin/Sib, but it has been and continues to be moving faster than any of >> them. And I disagree that it is not innovative. It's just that the >> innovations that are added seem to be the pet projects of those who are >> willing to put in the time to implement them and may not be the >> innovations >> you or I want. >> >> FWIW, you can find the MuseScore road map here: > http://musescore.org/en/**developers-handbook/**references/musescore-2.0-* > *roadmap<http://musescore.org/en/developers-handbook/references/musescore-2.0-roadmap> > > Most of the development items are things that have been in Finale and > Sibelius, of course. I don't see anything innovative there. It looks like > they are doing nothing but reverse engineering the 20-year-old products. > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
