Kind of funny to be talking legacy features so early in its inception. But I thought I’d mention this as a feature request. While avoiding bloated software, when you do add changes and improvements, could you consider leaving a revert option available when possible. Either a switch to turn off a new feature or a just the other option being available.
I haven’t encountered it yet here, but “new features and improvements” are sometimes implemented with no way back but to using an older version.
I think I suffer this effect most from operating and browser system makers but it does happen with other software as well.
Again, of course, I and likely no one else wants the software to become overstuffed and sluggish, but just to consider if it is feasible to leave older options available. Particularly if they were popular. (might need a survey for that)
Thanks for your attention.
Do you have any particular examples in mind of popular options that are no longer available?
There are very few new features that have caused changes to existing scores. Paragraph Styles for Lyrics in Dorico 4.1 is probably the only thing I can think of.
Most other things have been additional Options that you can assign, or not; and not doing so usually leaves things as they were.
Taking the lyrics as an example – if there was a preference to have “pre-4.1” Lyrics and “post 4.1 Lyrics”; then that would be twice as much development work; an additional check when supporting problems; and confusion for the user.
Now multiply that by every improvement that changes behaviour…
No, particular options. But I’ve experienced it elsewhere. After all the suggestions for improvements start to slow down, seems like programmers start to get itchy fingers and start imagining enhancements on their own when they’ve seemed to run out of things to do.
At least that’s my theory.
I don’t think the Dorico developers will have this problem for many years to come.
Just keep older dorico versions installed?
I don’t know if going back and forth between a couple Dorico’s for possibly only one reason is ideal either but it certainly would work.