Steve Harris wrote: >On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 10:08:47 -0400, Lee Revell wrote: > > >>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 01:42 +0100, Steve Harris wrote: >> >> >>>comparing Ardour to Cubase >>>itsn't really reasonable as Ardour is a lot more sophisitcated >>> >>> >>Are there people who consider Cubase user friendly? I guess it's >>reasonable for MIDI people, but if you just want to do audio it's a >>baffling ordeal. >> >> >Yeah, I always thought so, but then I often find windows baffling. But >that bings up another point, people sometimes forget how much they had to >learn to use thier "natural" apps :) > > Agreed. As I implied under the "Poor Schmuck" thread, learning any type of specialized application takes a bit of time. When you have a couple of popular audio applications under your belt the next might be a bit easier. The time it takes to learn the next audio app is usually dependent on previous acquired knowledge. If the new app is similar and the user can use past knowledge, the user will usually declare that it is "easy" to use. Put another way, the vast majority of applications are "easy" to use -- the learning curve is what we are really talking about. Documentation is just a means to and end. I separate application usage from system usage -- patching linux kernels, tuning windows drivers, etc. -- is different can of worms all together. -- Brad Fuller (408) 799-6124 ** Sonaural Audio Studios ** (408) 799-6123 West San Jose (408) 799-6124 Cambrian ________________________________ Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com
