backwoods
From my viewpoint Kenny: I don't use Sonar Notation and never will. I don't care for it to be developed. Other daws- Cubase, Digital Performer, Pro Tools et al have superior notation. Rather than constant frustration about Sonar's notation, why not just buy another DAW? 

Well for a really good reason. Having been with Cakewalk for 20 years and spent a lot of time and money staying with it, and loving it most of the time, it seems a small thing in comparison to wish the notation fixed rather than jumping ship and having to spend a great deal of time and money to get a ride on that "other ship".

To say that Cakewalk shouldn't spend time fixing notation is like saying that a car manufacturer (take your pick) shouldn't fix the problem with the windshield wipers (or any other car part you care to pick) because "Hey everything else works so great and I live in the desert so I never need them. To heck with all you other drivers!"  The minute that Cakewalk decided to include notation they had an obligation to make sure that it worked. Sure I would love for them to make improvements. BUT I would settle for them fixing the things that are broken that are there already.

Well said, annifarkle .
 
The notion that musicians using Sonar should be above wishing that the included notation element worked somewhat better (because only "old school" fogeys care about notation, possibly? -and what a nerve those notation nuts have, wanting any precious time possibly taken away from the cutting-edge elements the cutting-edge users want?), and the strange counter arguments, like, "Gee, why don't you just buy another DAW?" are bemusing.
 
We'd just like some time spent making using notation pleasant.
LJ

It shouldn't really matter whether you believe that staff notation is a good or bad system. It's there so make use of it. I'm not a big fan of staff notation myself, but I do find that Staff View and Piano Roll View complement each other quite well so I use them both. They each provide a slightly different perspective on the same midi data. One shows a better overview of the arrangement while the other is ideal for detailed editing. It doesn't have to be "either/or". We should all be using all the available tools that prove to be useful.

Stating that you will never use a particular feature just seems like posturing. I get the impression that some users are taking a stance against Staff View because they apparently think it belongs to some elite set that they don't want to be associated with. Maybe it's not rock-n-roll enough. There are probably some other important features in Sonar that I have not gotten round to incorporating into any of projects myself yet, but I am certainly not ruling out taking any of these onboard in the future.

Kev999
It shouldn't really matter whether you believe that staff notation is a good or bad system. It's there so make use of it. I'm not a big fan of staff notation myself, but I do find that Staff View and Piano Roll View complement each other quite well so I use them both. They each provide a slightly different perspective on the same midi data. One shows a better overview of the arrangement while the other is ideal for detailed editing. It doesn't have to be "either/or". We should all be using all the available tools that prove to be useful.

Stating that you will never use a particular feature just seems like posturing. I get the impression that some users are taking a stance against Staff View because they apparently think it belongs to some elite set that they don't want to be associated with. Maybe it's not rock-n-roll enough. There are probably some other important features in Sonar that I have not gotten round to incorporating into any of projects myself yet, but I am certainly not ruling out taking any of these onboard in the future.

Careful Kev - keep that up and someone will be telling you to go and use another DAW.

Kev999
... Staff View and Piano Roll View complement each other quite well so I use them both. They each provide a slightly different perspective on the same midi data. One shows a better overview of the arrangement while the other is ideal for detailed editing. It doesn't have to be "either/or". We should all be using all the available tools that prove to be useful.

 
That's how I use it. I have the staff view open at the top of the screen and use the piano view to enter data. 
 

Let me point put that there was a time when Sonar's "Staff View" was way better than the rest of the DAWs.   

Kev999
I get the impression that some users are taking a stance against Staff View because they apparently think it belongs to some elite set that they don't want to be associated with. Maybe it's not rock-n-roll enough.

 
You may be right, but I don't recall seeing anyone say that. I have, however, seen some staff view proponents theorize that people who aren't interested in staff view feel that way, which I think applies at most to a small minority, if at all. Also speaking of small minorities, some staff view proponents come off as thinking they're more sophisticated for using it and feel those who don't aren't "real musicians." 
 
However, my take is that the vast majority of people to whom staff view is important feel that way simply because they find it a more comfortable/familiar or productive environment for editing, and don't attach value judgments to it one way or the other. It's just another tool to them.
 
 

IMO, the anti-SV crowd is concerned that an intense amount of development pouring into SV would necessarily take away from development in other areas.  Of course this isn't necessarily true, depending on how Cake went about staffing* this [to date] fictitious Staff View initiative.

backwoods
Buy something for what it is- not for something you desire it to be in the future. I hope you guys get what you want but maybe it's not that easy or they would have done it already. Or maybe not many people want it!

 
We did! Sonar has advertized Staff View as a MIDI editing feature for at least the last 7 years that I have been supporting CW. There are many here who have been using Sonar a lot longer, and claim the Staff View issues predate my beginning with CW. When we purchased Sonar we thought the feature would work properly. With every new release, we were again disappointed with the lack of attention to known issues. We were/are told repeatedly, "We are looking at it", It's on our radar",  "under new ownership, now we might be able to get to it", etc. Yet, 7 years and 5 major releases later, we are still having the same discussion.
I guess those of us "hoping" for the promised fixes are the definition of insanity. 
 
Using Anni's analogy above, if the windshield wipers on the car that I bought didn't work properly, telling me to "just go buy a different car" is disingenuous at best. And telling me, "but your car has bluetooth, GPS, rear camera, collision avoidance, etc." is no better. I/we just want the windshield wipers to work. Why is that too much to ask?
 
 

Pro Tools has only very recently added a notation view. I think version 9? I have 6 and 7 and only use Pro Tools when forced to. Strictly because it doesn't have notation. There are three main reasons I use Sonar, in order of significance:

1. It has notation view 
2. I am very familiar with the application
3. It doesn't have the insane system requirements of Pro Tools.

I require notation view to compose two or more instrument parts simultaneously.  I simply cannot do it in PRV. If I have a bassline, keys, and three horns...I'm going to notation view for composing/editing. 
 
I use Sibelius to print more legit sheet music, but it kind of sucks for composing/editing music as you're writing it.