I want to begin this post by saying that I am aware that programming is much more complicated than the typical end-user appreciates, and that I have had nothing but positive experiences dealing with PG Music sales staff, support staff, etc. They are a great company and put out a good product and support it wel. That said, I do not understand why a program as good as BIAB still has a basic user interface that looks like a 1980s era piece of software.

The basic element of the program - the chord sheet - while functional and intuitive in many ways, is well below what I think we should get when paying top dollar for a computer program.

If the program is playing music, then the basic interface should look like a piece of music, not an abstract "hyperpad" or spreadsheet.

Meaning, something that looks like a lead sheet in the Real Book. A stave with an actual key signature, time signature, and melody. Chord symbols above the stave, etc.

And, most importantly: functional, usable elements of sheet music like first and second endings, repeat signs, codas, possibly even dynamic markings, etc. As the program exists, a typical new user or infrequent user is constantly hamstrung trying to "translate" from what is a relatively universally understood, simple system of symbols (sheet music), into "BIAB" equivalents.

An analogy would be old word processing programs, which were not "what you see is what you get," and you had to input your text in the "Word Perfect" translation, and hope that when you hit the print button, the end document looked the way you wanted. The change to WYSIWYG formats in word processors was monumental. BIAB is like a 1980's word processor.

Perhaps it would be a herculean task to change the format this way. Maybe it would make the program much larger, in terms of code, etc. Maybe it wouldn't be worth it.

But in my opinion, as the program exists right now, it is a powerful but somewhat disappointing program.