Apple Logic Pro /LogicExpress Discussion

On Jan 24, 2005, at 11:34 AM, GAmoore@... wrote:

> In a message dated 1/23/05 5:57:18 PM, dennis@... 
> writes:
>
>> I have been working with top end pro engineers for 20 years and I can 
>> tell you that the thing they hate the most is stuff that is flaky and 
>> complex.
>
> Thats good to know. But the debate is not what the top pro's are 
> doing, its what kind of product Apple/Emagic put out.

As far as I know we all more or less know what kind of product they 
*have* put out, and the debate is about what kind of product people 
think they *should* put out.

> If what you say is correct, then Apple/Emagic are producing all sorts 
> of complicated products for a non-existent clientele that are looking 
> for complicated things, meanwhile all the other users - pro, semi-pro, 
> amateur, weekend music warrior - are not being considered.

That is almost exactly what I believe.

The only thing I would disagree with here is the tense and the names of 
the protagonists.  In the past tense that description fit many aspects 
of Emagic's Logic to a T.

In the present tense Apple's products are an entirely different can of 
worms Apple has their marketing thrust and much of the attitude in 
Logic design has changed a lot since it got the new brand name.

> I don't mean to be too sarcastic,

I didn't know you were being sarcastic.  I think it is a valid point.  
But as I keep saying the attitude behind logic is clearly changing.

> as you said, there are marketing people who want new features to 
> advertise.

I did not actually say that.  Whether new features do or don't make 
their way into the program is peripheral to the issue I am referring to 
and as long as new features don't interfere with stability or core 
functionalities I don't have much of an opinion either way about that.  
What concerns me is the elegance and professionalism of the 
implementation of the professional features that are there.