Oh, Oh, OH! My mistake! My memory was running things together. Thanks for setting me straight, DJA!
I take it all back. About the video, that is. I'm not sure if I retract the "100% vaporware" label, though. It still seems to fit (actually Mr. Patterson applied it, first, but I jumped in with both feet, partially in mouth). Yeah, I don't - it's still vaporware. Raymond Horton Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) UMC Composer, Arranger VISIT US AT rayhortonmusic.com On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Darcy James Argue <djar...@earthlink.net>wrote: > Again, that spoofed video that you guys are talking about is for a > completely different product, ThinkMusic. > > Steinberg's Daniel Spreadbury (formerly of Sibelius) is one of the people > who helped *expose* it. > > I repeat my link: > > > http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/makers-of-music-handwriting-app-video-used-sibelius-and-goodreader-to-create-dramatization/ > > Cheers, > > - DJA > ----- > WEB: http://www.secretsocietymusic.org > > On Sep 18, 2013, at 1:25 AM, Raymond Horton <horton.raym...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > The video is what made it instant vaporware. > > > > That video reminded me of the movie "Tucker." > > > > (I'm assuming that there was some Hollywood compression and exaggeration > in > > the film, but for these purposes I'll take the film as as fact.) > > > > Tucker and cronies crammed together a car for an early showing that was a > > total sham, but eventually came up with a product that was innovative > and a > > classic. (He then was forced out of business by corrupt pols in league > > with the Big Three automakers, but let's hope that is not part of the > > notation story.) > > > > If that movie stopped after that first bogus showing we would have no > idea > > if the Tucker (car) ever came to be. That's where we are now, with the > > Steinberg-Spreadbury notation app. We had the bogus preview video > (which > > I cannot seem to locate, now) and bright people are hard at work behind > the > > scenes, but only the air expended on their promises is out there. > > Vaporware. > > > > As I said, I wish them only the best. Their success could only help the > > industry, just as that of Sibelius did. > > > > Raymond Horton > > Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra > > Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) UMC > > Composer, Arranger > > VISIT US AT rayhortonmusic.com > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Craig Parmerlee <cr...@parmerlee.com > >wrote: > > > >> On 9/17/2013 2:18 PM, Raymond Horton wrote: > >>> I think Steinberg notation software is, at this point, the poster boy > >> for "100% > >>> vaporware." They put out a video with demos made on a totally > different > >>> product, for goodness' sake! > >>> > >>> I wish them only the best, and hope the ultimate product does all that > is > >>> promised and more, but only vapor is available now. > >>> > >> But they are not representing it as a product, only as a development > >> project. While the implication may be that they indent to produce a > >> discrete notation product that would be "Sibelius: The Next Generation", > >> if you will, it is possible that these efforts would roll back into the > >> Cubase platform to extends its notation capabilities. > >> > >> I don't think suppliers should ever be discouraged from talking about > >> the future as long as they aren't making any solid promises they can't > >> keep. > >> > >> The natural inclination of software suppliers (incumbents especially) is > >> to clam up. There can be several reasons for this: > >> > >> 1) If what they have to say isn't all that impressive, that will lose > >> loyalty during the incubation period. > >> 2) If what they have to say is so-so, they would rather hold everything > >> for a big flashy announcement. > >> 3) If what they have to say is really impressive, they don't want to > >> give the competition a chance to get organized against their messages. > >> > >> And conversely, a newcomer is more likely to talk openly: > >> > >> 1) To get some attention > >> 2) To start to dislodge loyalties with the incumbents > >> 3) To freeze people from buying competitor upgrades in the interim > >> 4) If they decide the incumbents aren't really competing very much > anyway. > >> > >> We will have to wait until 2016 to see what 2016 really looks like, but > >> I don't see where some speculation hurts anyone. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Finale mailing list > >> Finale@shsu.edu > >> http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Finale mailing list > > Finale@shsu.edu > > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
