Sibelius

[SlowOrg]

Just stumbled upon this ...

 

http://www.artsjourn...the-lights.html

 

I really don’t want to start a debate about current economic issues but this to me is simply outrageous.

 

M

[David Drinkell]

Just stumbled upon this ...

 

http://www.artsjourn...the-lights.html

 

I really don’t want to start a debate about current economic issues but this to me is simply outrageous.

 

M

 

Hell!! Sibelius is one of the most useful and invaluable things I have encountered in my entire career!

[pwhodges]

I learnt about this just days after I finally bought a copy only a month ago (I use Lilypond mainly, but it's rather tedious for some things). A sad example of modern business practices; though some of the things Apple are doing are as bad for Mac users in businesses.

 

Paul

[Colin Harvey]

Very sad to read about this.

 

But this sort of thing happens all the time in IT.

 

Generally, Darwinism eventually rules in these sorts of circumstances: if a product isn't developed and improved, another product will evolve as a better product and will take over as product of choice in this market as Sibelius dies.

 

It may be that the original founders of Sibelius will set up a competitor company, re-recruit their old team and set up under another banner as the competition. I've seen it done but it depends on the T&Cs of the buy-out.

 

It's a great shame to read of this: the original Sibelius company was often held up as an example of a very well-run and managed software house.

[pcnd5584]

But this sort of thing happens all the time in IT.

 

Generally, Darwinism eventually rules in these sorts of circumstances: if a product isn't developed and improved, another product will evolve as a better product and will take over as product of choice in this market as Sibelius dies. ...

 

Except that this is not the case, here. Sibelius was being continually upgraded and improved; now all staff have been dismissed and the offices shut down - consequently they are being denied the opportunity further to improve their product. We are told that the software writers have enough material in order for the new 'parent' company to issue an improved version in a year or two (Sibelius 8) - but this is simply a matter of smoke and mirrors. This may be nothing more than a cynical attempt by the new owners to re-assure users that Sibelius is still 'alive and well', as it were.

 

In my view, this smacks of nothing other than simple profiteering.

[ick1508]

Recently bought an academic licence (for my son) which comes with 4 years' support. Hm. Some irony there.

Great stuff though. Want to arrange something for brass band? Complete ensemble score all laid out for you. What could possibly go wrong?

(Chariots of Fire, if you must know, as a hymn tune)

[Vox Humana]

Recently bought an academic licence (for my son) which comes with 4 years' support.

 

Hope Avid keep to the deal. My son, who is a professional sound designer, tells me that when Avid bought M-Audio (makers of audio interfaces) the drivers became unreliable and customers had to pay to get tech. support for products that no longer worked properly. Avid have now sold that company. I suppose they will do the same with Sibelius once the returns drop.

 

I don't use Sibelius, but I wonder how much more development it needs. Successful software undergoes continual development, not so much because it needs improvement, but because of the need to issue continual upgrades in order to keep cash flowing in. The result is bloatware. MS Office reached this stage at least a decade ago. Of course there is the need to keep up to date with changing operating systems. Will Sibelius work under Windows 8?

[davidh]

Of course there is the need to keep up to date with changing operating systems. Will Sibelius work under Windows 8?

That raises the interesting question of why new operating systems should be incompatible with older ones. There is no obvious technical reason why a new version of Windows, say, should not run all existing programs as before, while providing new facilities as options for new programs.

 

I am cynical enough to suspect that this is to necessitate the purchase of new versions of software which were quite satisfactory, thus helping the software industry, and as operating systems and programs get larger, forcing the user to upgrade the hardware as well.

[pwhodges]

It is easier to be cynical than to develop efficient operating systems. Microsoft's record in maintaining backward compatibility is excellent, as is the period that they support their operating systems (currently ten years or so, against Apple's two years). There is still an official way to run 16-bit Windows 3.1 applications from nearly 20 years ago in 64-bit Windows 7 Pro (using the supported Windows "XP-mode" virtual machine).

 

Paul