Maybe those comparisons of cars and Tvs were a bit over the top - although I'd like to know what your reasons are - you don't give any.
About Adobe and other patches, from Apple and MS Operating systems, I've been using Macs for almost two decades and I can't think of a single update that has done anything other than IMPROVE functionality and increase security. But I know from reading the list of new features when I update that there are indeed some bug fixes, though they have always seemed completely obscure to me. Their updates have only, typically, improved performance and security. Nobody addressed Mathematica, which is probably the most comparative software. I have a transcription/composition/engraving client, a major client, who just does not understand bugs at all and you should try explaining to someone that you purchased an expensive product that has things that don't work - he comes from the rest of the marketplace, like cars, Tvs, heating systems, whatever, where if you sold a new product that had issues, you would just take it back - because it was obviously broken and no professional product wouldn't work 100%. He doesn't get it at all. It makes it really embarrassing to apologize and try explain "this doesn't work properly, it's normal it's broken" And it's really made me question why software is any different. You can't say the sophisticated engineering that goes into manufacturing an entire car isn't potentially as detailed as a software app - considering there is a lot of software right there in car, for example? Best, Dean -- Dean Rosenthal www.deanrosenthal.org > On Oct 13, 2014, at 1:35 PM, Eric Dannewitz <ericd...@jazz-sax.com> wrote: > > Comparing software to a TV doesn't work. Or your car. Its ridiculous. > > Adobe's products are FAR from perfect and most of them have a list of legacy > bugs that would make Finale's look teeny weenie. And Adobe also does what > people are accusing MakeMusic of.....moving on and fixing issues (or working > around them) in newer versions. Most all companies do that I think (Apple, > Microsoft, Google, etc). > > >> On Oct 13, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Dean Rosenthal <deanrosent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> No. I don't understand why it's acceptable for a product to be sold with >> enough bugs. Paying for a bug-fix release (one that would riddled with at >> least some other issues) is not the answer. Imagine if you bought a >> widescreen tv, only to find that certain features worked only some of the >> time and some not at all, to compound this, your cable service also >> presented programming issues and challenges. Or your car. Features as >> prominent as a gauge. Or even a major program like Mathematica, which is at >> least equally sophisticated in context to Finale. Or an Adobe product. Think >> about what it would mean to the market and to advances and innovations. We >> are stuck with a great application that is unfortunately far from perfect >> and for some reason the company does not have high enough standards to >> perfect their product the way the other products I've mentioned perfect >> them. Comments? >> >> Dean >> >> -- >> Dean Rosenthal >> www.deanrosenthal.org >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
