Heya, I know I am being a bit sarcastic but thgeisel sort of summed it up. P5 really is powerful. I know once I get the hang of it, a few bugs get worked out, etc., it is going to really rock. But good instructions are important, and that is all the point I am trying to make. A lot of the frustration that I (and others) are having trying to learn the program could have been avoided. And a great many of the things we are calling bugs may just turn out to be user-related because we don't completely understand how to use the new features in P5 correctly, and that is due greatly in part to lack of good instruction. This makes for a lot of negative fallout, puts a lot of stress on the wonderful techs at CL who are having to deal with all the moans and groans. Plus it hits home to CL in general as bad PR. So much work went into making P5 great, and I don't want to take away from that. But when I read a manual that seems incomplete, with missing refrence material and what not, it tells me that it was not real high on the list of things to do. To me, that is a mistake, since no matter how great P5 is, or what cool features it has, the end-user has got to be able to understand how to use the software or else it is of little practical use. Now there are some really great sections in the manual, and I have learned stuff I didn't know. I only wish that tone had carried through in every section. But, I suspect, as I said, priority took issue and there was just so much else to get done, so the manual got rushed, and flaws and gaps were left intact. I know with time others will fill this gap with tutorials and what not, but that is not really how it should work.