I think Steinberg made it very clear as to “what was” and “was not” in the initial release - Version 1.0 and what would then follow in subsequent 1.x releases.
I first started in Finale at Version 1 some 20 years ago (although I now prefer Sibelius, but use both programs depending on delivery requirements etc). There is no comparison between Finale Ver 1 and Dorico 1, Dorico wins by miles, but of course IT technology is also 20 years further on.
The chances are that most of us are used to what Daniel always diplomatically calls “…other notation software…”, aren’t we?
Imagine that there were no other notation software at all in 2016.
Wouldn’t we be agog at Dorico v. 1.n?
And at the support - here and through the usual Steinberg channels?
And at what Dorico v. 1.n can do already?
And what it is clear that it will be able to do?
And at the resources behind a project with such high aspirations with a team like that behind Dorico who have started from scratch to create notation software for the C21st as composers actually work?
We’ve always been told what to expect in the ‘Fourth Quarter’; and we’ve got it.
We can grow with it.
If we have faith in Steinberg and the team - is there anyone who doesn’t? - these are very exciting times.
The car analogy is apt, but I feel you have it backwards. What they have in Dorico 1.0 is in fact an excellent engine, by far the best in any notation program so far, at least in terms of the engraving and layout. Furthermore, the UI design, especially the excellent keyboard support, is completely in a league of its own. These are important, because it’s the things you can’t change easily if you start on the wrong track, and which are sorely lacking in the competition. But in Dorico they nailed all the difficult stuff.
It’s certainly in need of features and optimization, or more details in the interior of the car, if you will, and personally until there’s a multistaff dynamic tool and large time signatures to name a few things, I’ll stick to Sibelius for my scoring sessions. But with such a stellar foundation, I don’t see any reason why Dorico wouldn’t get there.
So I would echo what Daniel said earlier, stay up to date on their future updates, because I’d be absolutely surprised if this doesn’t become the de facto software in notation as they progress a bit further.
I will also add, that Dorico might seem slow, to the point of not being able to work on large scores, but I disagree. There is a lag, which makes the program “feel” slow. But in reality, my experience has been that the lag never gets worse as the score increases in length. It moves with the same lag in measure 90 as it does it measure 1. So I believe that large scores are very doable. Just my 2 cents, though.
Robby
I wonder how many people wish they had bought into Facebook when it was a scrappy little startup. I see this as an investment (among other things). By the time Dorico is more fully formed, who knows if cross-grades will be available, and even with a more comprehensive manual, who would be able to adapt to its new workflow and capabilities fast enough to use it for production work right away.
So I’ll put up with the shortcomings and invest my time (just keeping up with all the entries here is a major time-commitment, but I’m learning an awful lot by reading them) and be ready to move fully to Dorico as it is ready for specific projects.
To add to your point: other notation programs may currently be a lot “faster” and more responsive, but how much time do you then spend fixing the score? In Dorico it seems that the heavy lifting is being done for you as you go, so much less time will be spent fixing engraving issues than other notation programs.
By that measure, Dorico is already a lot faster. 
Please do bear in mind that performance tuning and optimisation is something that we will do continually. There is plenty of scope for caching, invalidation tuning, etc. Initially our emphasis has to be that the score appearance is always correct (a risk of caching is that you trade speed for stale data, which would result in the score not displaying correctly – we judge that that is a trade-off that most users would not be happy with). We’ve developed Dorico with quite ‘pessimistic’ caching (to ensure correctness) that we can now try to loosen up.
We’ve already made some very positive improvements to the perceived lag during note input and navigation, and we’ll continue to improve that. If there are particular operations that you find to be slow then do let us know. We do know about (and are looking at) player deletion and repitching of selections. We are very aware that performance with large scores can be laggy, and we’re working to fix it.
The top & bottom of it is basically this… This software was not anywhere near ready for release, yet a financial decision was made to fleece potential customers and charge top dollar. By the time you get this somewhere near a product that you could sell (can you guys sleep?) because it is worth your current asking price it will probably be at version 3 or 4 and the poor customers you fleeced will have had to pay for the upgrades (probably doubling the original price payed. You leave a bad taste in my mouth…as you laugh all the way to the bank, this kind of attitude and business scam should be stopped, customers should be able to demand refunds…the fact that they can’t encourages this kind of scam to continue.
I have read (and quoted) many customers questions to Steinberg regarding updates and pricing, ALL of which go unanswered- alarm bells should be ringing guys, it’s obvious what they are going to do to you…
This is incorrect. They have indeed stated that certain features are guaranteed to be part of the free updates, and have also discussed the time frame, and what that depends on.
andyp13,
If the product was a 2.0 or 3.0 version your choice of loaded negative terms would be much more understandable. It’s the first week of a 1.0 version launch, for goodness sake. You might want to giver Steinberg, I dunno, a wee bit more’n a week to demonstrate their good faith with Dorico.
As it is you are making assumptions that they will not and passing it off as a settled fact. One might almost assume that the two-digit number following “andyp” is your age, the way you are behaving on this board. But I don’t believe such assumptions are “constructive.”
Daddy0, we will see who’s right and who’s wrong, and believe me I do hope it’s me. I don’t think Steinberg have done themselves any favours by releasing the software so early in its development and the price tag does not reflect that.
£450 is a lot of money for software in this state, and the worrying thing is the statement under the intended updates - that is certainly not in good faith.
And incase you have not read it -
Please note that the list of features that will be added in free updates to Dorico is subject to change.
And even if we ignore the missing features… what about the program being slow, laggy and freezing. I can’t work on a software which I bought and I’m being denied a refund. How shall we call it if not a scam? Steinberg should show the minimum of resect to their clients.
Feels like I will never buy any products from stein berg anymore.
“Sternberg” 
Made your post meaningless now 
My copy of Dorico is running smoothly on an OS that isn’t even officially supported. If you’re having problems, do your best to describe them so the team can figure out whether they can do something about it, but be aware that it is impossible to account for the myriad of variables in each different machine.
It’s threads such as this that make me with the forum software had a thumbs-down button for those who are more interesting in trolling as many threads as possible as they are in getting a specific problem solved. This is particularly discourteous when the Steinberg staff is overworked enough keeping up with actual software problems that need fixing and can be addressed with the current software capabilities.
We get it. Some folks wish they had waited to purchase.
You’ve done nothing of the sort: you’ve posted the email you sent to Steinberg, posted a screenshot that, by your own admission, wasn’t helpful, and misspelled the name of the software.
Steinberg not willing to give a refund seems ill-advised, especially when they can revoke a license remotely. I’m not sure the rational for this. And with no trial period, one cannot fairly evaluate the product without buying it, or waiting until a trial is available. So I get your anger.
But punishing the developers - who have no control over this - is also equally wrong. You’re yelling at the wrong people.
It takes a certain amount of money to develop something as sophisticated as Dorico is, and will become. I couldn’t do it. Could you? They could only labor so many YEARS for free before needing some money back. Steinberg has bills to pay too. They deserve to be paid for all this effort. How long would you work for free?
Do we know the “back story” on why Dorico was released in its current state? Maybe Steinberg execs were losing a lot of money in the development process and gave the developers an ultimatum. You can only go so long without revenue. Try it sometime.
Maybe the developers have been begging Steinberg for more time for quite awhile. Perhaps it came to a head. I for one would rather “crowd fund” this baby and bet on Daniel and the team than lose Dorico altogether. These guys have tried to do this “right.” They are trying to do what no one else has done – really, really, REALLY think through the application before developing it. And then giving it the time necessary to build the foundation correctly. That takes guts. And a LOT of money. I applaud them.
Was it too “early” to release it? Seems like it. I can’t reliably do things with it yet. Anger justified there too. But poor faith?
Come on.
Cries of fraud and scam are completely unwarranted. These people are awesome. They gave us Sibelius. They have worked for 4 years to create Dorico, without us paying them one penny. They have shared their development progress and philosophy openly during the entire time, along with their reasonable expectations of what the software will and won’t do.
Bugs are to be expected. Even awful ones. It’s version 1.0.0.0.0.0! No one should be so cavalier as to abandon their previous working software for a completely unknown new system and expect it to work flawlessly. I was that young buck years ago, and I paid for it. Keep your current software until you know Dorico will reliably replace it.
This software will come up rapidly; I expect some patches very quickly, within a few weeks or less. As hard as these guys have been working, as little sleep as they’ve been getting, do you think they feel good about an angry mob ready to lynch them? They have integrity! Lighten up people!!
Your anger IS justified! And I understand your feelings.
But you can also be NICE about it! Yelling and screaming rarely gets anyone anything worthwhile. This isn’t a war. These developers are nice English gents who just want to make something you can be proud of, to create an enduring tool that will be the best of the best.
They’re stumbling a bit out of the gate. It takes a baby a little while to walk.
I’m genuinely sorry for the lack of usability of the software for many of you.
Just have patience. And write Steinberg a letter and let them know your feelings if you want a refund.
Also you could probably sell your license for a small discount. Many ways to get what you want.
Dorico will be superb, very soon.
Peace brothers.
The anger is about the unwilligness of steinberg to refund…
I’ve been sending crash logs and prefs to Daniel via private messages.
And misspelling the name of the software has a lot to do with your point, right? 