subtlearts
I'm in the relatively non-vocal and probably somewhat larger minority of people for whom it's not ever going to be a deal breaker, but who would dearly love to see some shine on the staff view - making tuplets work in a robust and flexible way would seem to be a great place to start. I will not give up hope that under the new model at least that much will happen at some point. As Craig points out, stranger things have happened along the way!
 

 
I'm in the same group. Bug fixes and improvements would be appreciated and useful but it's not a deal breaker.
 

subtlearts
I will also give an enthusiastic plus one to MuseScore, which is free, multi-platform, open-source and much deeper and more complete than most people realize. Scoring does not form a core component of my work or career, but I need to spin up arrangements at least a few times a year, for a variety of styles and instrumentations, and I have yet to run up against something I needed to do that I couldn't get done in Muse. I don't know if it does ReWire so that might be a limitation, but you never know - someone in the user/coder base might be working on it as we speak...

If I remember correctly they can't use ReWire because of the open source situation. (I might be wrong on this)
MuseScore does however support musicXML.  Version 2.0 is in beta2 status by the way, have tried it briefly and it seems like nice improvements.
 

Anderton
2. Count up the number of unique people posting in a six-page thread about Staff View. That's partially responsible for why it's considered a vocal minority.

I find this shortsighted, and Cakewalk's general reply pretty limp.  If there are few talking about Staff View here, it's perhaps because those that need it are elsewhere, using some other program.  Why not try and win them over ?

How many unique people does it take before a point becomes valid?
 
BTW, its 31 unique people in this thread and it's not even 6 pages yet!

 To assume the future is going to be like the past seems like not a safe assumption, given what's happened in the past 16 months.
 
I specifically responded regarding the source of the definitive statement that "No matter what Cakewalk says publicly it will never be addressed." That is a direct contraction to what Bill Jackson posted. I would have much preferred  a statement like "I'll bet nothing will ever happen" or "I highly doubt anything will happen" rather than essentially calling Bill a liar,  

 
Not calling anyone a liar at all.  My point is that what they are saying now is exactly what they have said since the 90’s.  They will always tell us that they are aware and that this is not the right time or that this new technology sets the framework ….  Essentially the same public statements for decades.  I don’t think they are being dishonest but that no matter what is said in public when they have design meetings it will never get on the agenda.
 

And frankly, I think he's done an excellent job in improving the core functionality of the program on which EVERYTHING, including enhancements to staff view, depend. 

 
Precisely what was said after Skylight was implemented.
 

So you are in the unusual position of believing a statement about the future of the program from someone who has no connection with the future of the program, and discounting the statements of someone who became product manager very shortly after the acquisition occurred, and is looking at this from a fresh perspective.

 
No one knows the future for sure but what I’m hearing today is exactly what I’ve always heard and the results have always been the same.  

This thread has become very interesting. I would think, as a longtime dedicated user of Cakewalk products, that it would be a no-brainer for Cakewalk to just look at the competition out there and see that if Cubase, Logic, etc. has a strong working notation editor, so should we. Again, I feel like a troll for all the havoc raised by starting this thread but to me even if we are referred to as a minority, it is quite comforting to know that the number of people interested in getting this fixed is growing.
I am quite happy for my uses with Notion. I hopped on it when Cakewalk was backing it. Cake should have snapped it up like Presonus. I have Finale. I use Sibelius in a friend's studio when working there. Wouldn't it be nice as someone else suggested that if you worked at another studio and the musicians or arrangers wanted to see the proper notation of a part, they could jump on line and get a month of subscription, add the cost to the studio bill. VIOLA! Because the Staff View works right, we can print out the score without jumping thru all the hoops of XMLing to another program. Not to mention that Sonar just may impress the studio guys enough to jump on board.
I just feel that the SV is so close to being right, how could fixing it be wrong!
I just had a funny thought. The year is 1826! Beethoven has just brought in his string quartets to be published. The print manager opens up the manuscript satchel and out pours.................................PRV screenshots! LOL!
 

I have voted for some improvements  - hope it helps... because they would improve the program.

michael diemer

vintagevibe
Staff View is dead.  No matter what Cakewalk says publicly it will never be addressed.  People need realize that.  This same thread has appeared in every release cycle since the 90's.  If you depend on notation Sonar is the wrong DAW.  There are other programs that have functional staff views that have not been abandoned.  

I know about Cubase. Are there other DAWS that have a decent staff view?

DP's staff view is OK, but it too cannot handle either dotted or tied triplets correctly (one or the other, Sonar doesn't display either correctly).   Cubase's staff view has many more options than Sonar's, but to me it's very clunky and I don't like the interface.   Most of Cubase's notation features assume the user wants to print edited scores so lots of markings are included.  I don't need that, I print my scores from Sibelius,  I just want a decent notation midi editor.  I don't know anything about Logic and though Pro Tools notation view is using some Sibelius technology PT still doesn't support any VST so I don't want to buy into that system.  Finally Sonar has the capacity to have multiple staff view opens at the same time--no other DAW can do this, it is an amazing time saver to have my winds, brass, percussion, synths and strings all in different windows where I don't have to be constantly switching individual instruments within one view.  That's why I put up with Sonar's notation, plus the fact that there are so many things about Sonar I love, including the event list, which is better than DP and Cubase.
 
One user keeps insisting that "if you are using Sonar for notation you're using the wrong program".  He's totally wrong.  Go to the link below and  listen to some of my work done in the Sonar staff view--it works, it just needs some bug fixes. I've produced 11 albums and 8.5 symphonies (working on new one!) with staff view, so I know what it can do and I know its limitations. It just needs some bug fixes.
 
Jerry
http://www.jerrygerber.com/symphony9.htm

Anderton

Kamikaze
Seeing the Staff View feature request broken down into small individual features looks promising to me. The 2 things that came up in the threads of old are Fixing Snap and Triplets. Now hopefully these will be seen as a priority.

I agree, good plan. If specific bugs are identified, that means a much greater likelihood of fixes then just saying "Why doesn't Cakewalk fix staff view?" over and over again. 

Fair enough.  I've been diligently reporting staff view bugs for a few years now using the Problem Reporter.  My bug reports are always very specific.

jsg
 
One user keeps insisting that "if you are using Sonar for notation you're using the wrong program".  He's totally wrong.  Go to the link below and  listen to some of my work done in the Sonar staff view--it works, it just needs some bug fixes. I've produced 11 albums and 8.5 symphonies (working on new one!) with staff view, so I know what it can do and I know its limitations. It just needs some bug fixes.
 
Jerry
http://www.jerrygerber.com/symphony9.htm

Hi Jerry how are you?  I applaud your ability to compose in Sonars staff view.  That speaks more to you ability and patience than the functionality of Sonar.  It is actually pretty amazing to me that you do such sophisticated work in Sonar's staff view but that doesn't mean that it is an easy or powerful tool compared to the the others.  The point that you are prolific in SV is not the issue here.  It is the capabilities of SV compared to other DAWS.  This thread shows that most people think it it needs work.  I know people who could build a house without power tools.  But I need power tools.  IMO if you depend on notation Sonar is not the best tool.  

+1 for fixing the Staff view.  I've been using Muse Score for note editing mostly because it's free, and can convert to Midi and import in Sonar, but it would be nice just to do notation score direct in Sonar.  I do alot of arrangements for church and we have a flute player and a sax player, and I'd love to just compose those parts in Sonar on keyboard and then direct print off sheet music that isn't full of notation errors and difficult to read.
 
That said I get CW is a business and needs to provide a bottom line.  However the new development cycle model may make it easier to implement fixes over time.
 
BTW, someone mentioned Notation and Studio One.  I'd hardly call those products integrated.  The work flow is not that different than what I do with Muse Score and Sonar.  Buying another company hardly makes your product integrated.  I like Studio One for a number of reasons, and mostly use it because I have to go from Mac at the church to PC at home for some projects, even though I far prefer Sonar.  Using MIDI in Studio One is like pulling teeth.  Pro Tools has better MIDI than Studio One, and that's not a compliment for PT.