On 06/12/13 17:59, Ryan McClure wrote:
While I think this is a good idea, I have a few reasons to hesitate. We don't want to just promote LilyPond to expert users; wouldn't we want any user to switch over? Any professional can make anything look good. An expert Micro$oft Paint user could probably reproduce the Mona Lisa if given enough time.
Yes, "if given enough time". The point of the comparison is to show the productivity of users of the software, measured in terms of the quantity of quality output they can produce in a fixed space of time. The reason to go to expert users is so that you don't bias the outcome from unfamiliarity or ignorance of the software.
What LilyPond does better than Finale/Sibelius is more excellent default engraving. How many times have people used Finale and gotten that dreaded last-bar-on-its-own-page problem? I believe the best test would be using ONLY defaults for Finale, Sibelius, and LilyPond to show what the programs can do--not what experienced users can do.
I disagree, because the faults of default Finale output are not serious faults if they're quick and easy to fix.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
