Re: Sibelius Software UK office shuts down

[Francois Planiol]

Not so small that you cant do enough money with it. Sib and finale has
grown as sequencers and interesting enough for many midi-ists,
specially for hobbyists. I am sure a big part of the market  of sib
(definitely easier than finale and with a big music-library) was not
engraving and not so professional.

Francois

2012/8/2, Lucas Gonze <address@hidden>:
> The market for music notation tools is very small! That's a major obstacle.
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Francois Planiol <address@hidden>
> wrote:
>> If this is faster (depends, entering notes and lyrics without tuning
>> the output is in lilypond faster) so Sibelius is victim of the same
>> capitalism it serves. No cry.
>>
>> But if Sib-programmers are smart, they would go startup...
>>
>> Francois
>>
>> 2012/8/2, Lucas Gonze <address@hidden>:
>>> I'm an ex-Sibelius user. Even though I know Lilypond syntax pretty
>>> well I still find that it would be much faster to use Sibelius.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Francois Planiol <address@hidden>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I know quite a bunch of of Sibelius users and their argumentation,
>>>> mostly are writing arrangements or compositions directly in the
>>>> computer. They just want to click the glyphes on a pentagrama
>>>> directly. I suppose a part them would not mind if Lily takes the hand
>>>> over spacing and other decisions, but these would only be conviced
>>>> with a pentagrama-frontend and a directly accessible midi-playback.
>>>> They think they have no time to learn a new method of writing music...
>>>> and want one installer for all the stuff.
>>>> On the other side, Sibelius will still work a while...
>>>> Francois
>>>>
>>>> 2012/8/2, Lucas Gonze <address@hidden>:
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>> More generally than that, I think the reason to discuss is to
>>>>>> _discover_
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> areas where you can cooperate.  There are obvious areas of
>>>>>> interaction
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> e.g. enabling Lilypond output for MuseScore and ensuring that it gets
>>>>>> updated effectively in response to Lilypond syntax changes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have considered using Lilypond as a back end for front end hacking,
>>>>> but the compile time from .ly to .svg is way too high.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it architecturally possible to make a significant amount of
>>>>> overhead go away? Are incremental compiles plausible?
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> lilypond-user mailing list
>>>>> address@hidden
>>>>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>>>>
>>>
>