Finale SmartMusic
  Home | Log In | Register | Search | Help
   
MakeMusic Forum > Public Forums > Finale - Macintosh - FORUM HAS MOVED! > Finale 2003...NO OSX native support for MAC??????  Forum Quick Jump
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum. You cannot reply to topics in this forum. Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

bralston
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailableClick to visit bralston's website.Send a Private Message to bralstonAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 5
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 1:04 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Well...it looks like Finale 2003 will not run in OSX natively on the MAC (but only in classic mode). This is really inexcusable. Foe me, this may be the one thing that pushes me over to Sibelius 2. I had thought that Finale 2003 would have added OSX support by now. Come on Coda Music! Isn't the Sibelius development team smaller than yours?

OS9 for MAC is dead. There is no way I am going to pay for another update to Finale that does not include OSX support natively. Running OS9 virtually in OSX is not the same thing. A lot of audio and midi drivers of other studio products will not run in classic mode but have to use OS9 natively. So basically this decision will mean that some people (with state of the art studio setups) will have to stay with OS9 if they chose to continue to run Finale and that is just unacceptable.

Composer
(Possible future Sibelius 2 user) :-(
Brian Ralston
Back to Top

Blastphemy
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailableClick to visit Blastphemy's website.Send a Private Message to BlastphemyAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jul 2002
Total Posts : 7
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 1:29 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I totally agree - I came to this message board for the sole purpose of finding out if Finale 2003 runs natively in OS X (and not via "Classic"). NOWHERE does Coda mention the system requirements for Finale 2003 for Macintosh, FOR THIS VERY REASON!!

They KNOW they promised us that the next version would be OS X native, and I guess they think that by not mentioning the operating system at all, we'll all just buy it and not notice?

Extreme incompetence from Coda. I have just put in my order for Sibelius 2, and will spend the next two weeks transferring ALL my Finale files into it. Good bye, Coda.
Back to Top

ephraim
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to ephraimAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jan 1999
Total Posts : 510
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 1:31 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Maybe you should calm down and think things over a
bit before making the decision to jump off the
wagon. Sibelius is one of the few music programs
that have OS10 support. Most of the music
sequencer programs do not support even classic
mode. Logic, which was recently bought by Apple
and is a predominantly Mac product only supports
non-classic 9.2 even for their release of Logic Gold
later this month, so Coda is not alone. My concern
about Finale is mostly their unwillingness to listen to
what the current users are saying about the
program. I am not really looking foward that much
to OS10 because my experience with it on my iBook
700/384ram is it is rather sluggish, and I fear
Finale might be even more sluggish. I haven't been
reading about the Finale 2003 reaction on the
Windows forum. Is there any excitement over
there?

ephraim hammett jones
MusicScribe
Back to Top

cliffdzihner
Registered Member



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to cliffdzihnerAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jun 2000
Total Posts : 486
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 1:50 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
On 7/16/2002 5:29:00 PM, Eric Rosenberg wrote:

>They KNOW they promised us
>that the next version would be
>OS X native,

No, they never did. They were very careful to not do this. One couldn't help to notice. There has been NUMEROUS posts on this very topic and this is always the conclusion.
Back to Top

jbmelby
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailableClick to visit jbmelby's website.Send a Private Message to jbmelbyAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 39
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 2:19 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I was one of those who, with all the assurance
born of ignorance, used to bash Sibelius without
having given it a fair trial. When it was announced
that Finale 2003 would lack Mac OS X support, I
weighed carefully the decision whether or not to
buy Sibelius because of its OS X support, and
finally I decided to go ahead and do it.

Becoming accustomed to Sibelius was not easy,
since there are many conceptual differences
between it and Finale--and I had been a Finale
user for nearly ten years. However, after using
Sibelius for several weeks now and having
adjusted to its differences, I simply cannot
imagine ever going back to Finale, even if Coda
were to come out with an OS X-compatible
version tomorrow.

As always, YMMV--but if anyone tells you that
Sibelius is a piece of [insert your favorite four-
letter word here], I would strongly suggest
downloading the demo and trying it for yourself. I
did--and I'm very happy to have done so.
Back to Top

guser
Registered Member

Click to send guser email.Personal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to guserAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Mar 2001
Total Posts : 661
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 2:25 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
>> I haven't been reading about the Finale 2003 reaction on the Windows forum. Is there any excitement over there?
Oh, a little, I guess...

Click me.
Me, too.
Me, three.
Me, four.
Me, five.


Back to Top

cliffdzihner
Registered Member



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to cliffdzihnerAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jun 2000
Total Posts : 486
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 5:54 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
On 7/16/2002 6:19:00 PM, John Melby wrote:
>after using
>Sibelius for several weeks now
>and having
>adjusted to its differences, I
>simply cannot
>imagine ever going back to
>Finale,

Can you name a couple of the highlights that make you feel this way? Or, is it just a feel thing?
Back to Top

kkastens
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to kkastensAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Dec 1999
Total Posts : 18
 
   Posted 7/16/2002 7:18 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I too am very disappointed that OS X is not natively supported in Finale 2003. Finale is now the only application I use that requires OS 9. I have purchased and wrote an arrangement using Sibelius 2 (it works fine in OS X with my current hardware setup!), but I still *prefer* Finale.

However, our university will be fully supporting OS X later this fall, including our music technology lab. Finale may lose 31 site licenses if OS X is not supported in the very near future!
Back to Top

ephraim
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to ephraimAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jan 1999
Total Posts : 510
 
   Posted 7/17/2002 9:05 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I just read some of the links posted by Annon. a few
messages up and I must admit they certainly have a
lively forum there in Windozeland. There seems to
be a common problem expressed in comments on
both forums--Coda is not responding to their user
base. With so many issues raised about the new
release by Windows users, it is no surprise that
there is little OS10 support. I just upgraded to 2002
a few months ago and frankly I wish I had stayed
with 2001. One by one I was disaponted to discover
the bugs that hadn't been addressed in 2002 and
although I haven't encountered anything fatal, there
have been things that happen every once in a while
that make me more nervous than 2000 or 2001
ever did. That plus several more (really) annoying
bugs in 2002 has made me wary about upgrading to
2003 if Coda hasn't changed its response to bug
reports. Still, I love those new slurs, and if that
were the only feature they had added in a new
version (and they fixed the bugs) I would gladly have
upgraded just for this.

ephraim hammett jones
MusicScribe
Back to Top

M Copyist
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to M CopyistAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Sep 2000
Total Posts : 44
 
   Posted 7/17/2002 10:27 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
On 7/17/2002 1:05:00 PM, Ephraim Jones wrote:
>Coda is not
>responding to their user
>base.

{snip}

>One by one I was
>disaponted to discover
>the bugs that hadn't been
>addressed in 2002
>upgraded just for this.
>
This is not a new phenomenon. The one consistent
theme that Coda has displayed regarding upgrading
their program is that they only respond to corporate
pressure. The more money you invest in Finale et al.
the quicker your issues are resolved - case in point
Hal Leonard. Reporting bugs and making requests
through the proper channels, for the average user, is
generally useless.

C4


Back to Top

agilulfo
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailableClick to visit agilulfo's website.Send a Private Message to agilulfoAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 18
 
   Posted 7/18/2002 10:58 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
I usually buy every other version of Finale
with the hope that Coda could take care of
bugs at least every two versions. After
reading all the horror stories about 2002 I
am glad that I stuck with 2001 which has
a few bugs but at least I know what they
are.
This to me seems the major problem
afflicting the software industry today.
Customers are sold products which are
ridden with bugs as if it was normal (I
guess because it has become the norm).
I wonder if anybody would accept such a
treatment from a car dealer or a dentist
without demanding some sort of
settlement.
As far as the OSX issue is concerned I
have to agree with the death of OS 9
thesis. I used to be happy with OS 8.6 but
then my hd was destroyed during a move
and when I went to look for the OS disks I
could not find them. I then bought OS X
and 9 but because of Finale I am forced
to use OS 9 almost exclusively (I tried
switching back and forth but it was very
confusing especially when it came to
managing emails and browser cookies).
This is not to say that I like OS X, I just
don't know yet, but OS 9 is just a pain
because it crashes the machine at least
3 or four times a day (that is whenever I try
to use more than one or two applications
at the same time like Finale and
Explorer). I've given up trying to figure out
extensions conflicts as I believe that's the
main reason why OS 9 was dropped,
because it became unmanageable.
All this to say that I really hoped finale
2003 would be OS X native but
unfortunately it seems like I have to wait
at least another two years: one year for
Coda to release a native version, and at
least another for them to make it work
decently.

Marco Accattatis
Back to Top

Stocky60
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to Stocky60AIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jul 2002
Total Posts : 3
 
   Posted 7/19/2002 2:06 PM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
>>Well...it looks like Finale 2003 will not
run in OSX natively on the MAC (but only
in classic mode). This is really
inexcusable.<<

I was disgusted when I received my copy
of Finale _2002_ and it launched under
Classic. There is just no way I'm forking
over any money for any more apps that
are not OS X native. The third major
release of OS X (Jaguar) is out next week,
for gosh sakes!
Back to Top

PeterKienle
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailableClick to visit PeterKienle's website.Send a Private Message to PeterKienleAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined May 2000
Total Posts : 321
 
   Posted 7/20/2002 8:50 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
My initial reaction to all this anti-Finale talk
was that I agreed that I
wouldn't purchase another upgrade if it
wasn't OS X native or at least
properly carbonized.

But I have changed my mind somewhat.
1) I have been using Finale very heavily
since version 2.5. I paid for
each upgrade and each upgrade had
enough features and improvements to
make
it worth my while. Granted, an app like
Photoshop may go through many more
visible changes each version cycle but
then Adobe is a bigger organization.

2) Over the years whenever I called tech
support my issues were always
addressed and the problem solved and
without too much waiting for an answer
either. I can't say that for much of the other
software I use.

3) I am eager to use OS X more often but I
still can't use my printer from
OS X. I don't have a problem starting up
into OS 9 doing some things.
(Although, sometimes I use Finale
together with Frontier and Panorama to
create webpages and that would be really
nice to do in OS X - but, Panorama
is not carbonized yet either). And yes, it's
painful to switch back and
forth just because of keeping preferences
synchronized and such.

4) My favorite utility with Finale is
Keyquencer to make it more accessible
for AppleScript and create single
keystroke actions. I have tried
Quickkeys and it's less complicated but it
didn't quite do as much. Now,
Keyquencer won't be ported to OS X and
the company gets you a discount to
upgrade to Quickkeys on OS X instead. I
tried the demo and was very
disappointed.

5) I have played around with Sibelius and
found it sucked for me. Had a
full version installed on my machine for a
customer who requested I use it
and despite having the manual and
access to their support couldn't get the
simplest things going. (Ok, that was pre
version 2).

6) Tried a demo of Noteability. It looks
promising and it looks as if it
can do a lot but it took me two days to
finish a simple lead sheet. But
that may just be me. Somehow, I guess,
the 'Finale-way' of doing things is
in my genes. Still, if these programs were
'so easy', even I should be
able to experience that.

7) When OS X first arrived I installed it to
play with the Developer
tools. They are great. But in Cocoa things
are different enough from pre
OS X that doing a native (basically a
brandnew version, from the ground
up) version seems like a huge task - it
might be easier to scratch the US
tax code and start over.

But that's just me.

Peter
Back to Top

fmattivi
Registered Member

Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to fmattiviAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 1
 
   Posted 7/23/2002 6:10 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
incredible incredible
no native finale for X!!!
Coda what are you doing....???
totally confirming in this
incredible
incredible
just remain Sibelius 2.........
Back to Top

kignature
Registered Member

Click to send kignature email.Personal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to kignatureAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Apr 2000
Total Posts : 337
 
   Posted 7/23/2002 8:07 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
On 7/23/2002 10:10:00 AM, Fabio Mativi wrote:
>incredible incredible
>no native finale for X!!!
>Coda what are you
>doing....???
>totally confirming in this
>incredible
>incredible
>just remain Sibelius
>2.........

So I assume you don't use logic? They aren't done yet, either. Performer? They don't even mention X in the system requirements. Lord only knows when they'll be ready. At least Coda is saying that they're working on it...

From my understanding, Jaguire (OS 10.2) will be the first one with anything useful as far as MIDI or Audio are concerned. So I wouldn't get too grumpy about OSX support yet.
Back to Top

cliffdzihner
Registered Member



Email Address Not AvailablePersonal Homepage Not AvailableSend a Private Message to cliffdzihnerAIM Not AvailableICQ Not AvailableY! Not AvailableMSN Not Available
Date Joined Jun 2000
Total Posts : 486
 
   Posted 7/23/2002 8:13 AM (GMT -5)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.

On 7/23/2002 10:10:00 AM, Fabio Mativi
>wrote:
>incredible incredible
>no native finale for X!!!
>Coda what are you
>doing....???
>totally confirming in this
>incredible
>incredible
>just remain Sibelius
>2.........

I'm still trying to figure out the 'totally confirming in this' part.................
Back to Top
You cannot post new topics in this forum. You cannot reply to topics in this forum. Printable Version
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Friday, September 25, 2020 7:51 PM (GMT -5)
There are a total of 403,820 posts in 58,165 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads