News and Reviews > Official Announcements

Revitalizing the Reviews - Everyone Read in Please

<< < (8/9) > >>

zridling:
My own reviews would be limited to my interests, and perhaps that's a good model for others, too, like myself. However, the programmers here are on a whole higher level of understanding when it comes a wide variety of software, and able to intelligently talk about their more complex and arcane features. For example, although I'm deeply involved with and interested in text editors, I could not have written the in-depth review/s that mouser did on the subject; I just don't know enough about code folding and other, high-end features to write about them with ease.

On the other hand, like nudone, if graphics — or perhaps word processing, spreadsheets, or disk management — software is your expertise (i.e., love), then you have an advantage that can be shared with the rest of us. Same is true if you develop an interest say, in some utility software or outlining software or what have you, for example.

Review categories can naturally be expanded; for example, when mouser followed up on his text editor review to update many programs there, and nudone's recent extended review of DonationCoder.com's Graphics winner, ACDSee, which has now evolved toward professional photographers with ACDSee Pro. Those kinds of reviews are not only enormous time savers for users, but are able to show you why certain programs deserve our attention.

For my Archive Tools review, most of my time (literally a entire month) was spent testing the programs' features, and then retesting and retesting in comparison with each other. I also tried to read every review I could find online of archivers, and detect their weaknesses and strengths. Most reviews were interested in only one thing — compression ratio — and nothing else. But compression ratio alone doth not make a great archive program. Thus, there's a measure of judgment that one must bring to the final review.

Fortunately, when I had questions or needed help with certain archivers, someone here in the DonationCoder.com family came to my aid, and mouser himself is a lifesaver, so you won't be alone. These are some things to consider, and if you do decide to dive in and write a review, you'll learn more than you ever expected to, and have a blast!

superboyac:
Mouser, you know that I'd be willing to do the reviews.  But I may have a few suggestions as to how to make this process more manageable to most of us who are pretty busy with our other commitments.  I won't get into it right now, since I have to go back to work, but I'll post something soon.

By the way, as far as reviews go, there are "reviews" and there are "shootouts".  The shootouts are A LOT of work.  Reviews aren't so bad.  I can review an individual piece of software and do a good job once a month or so.  But a shootout is a whole other animal, that is a huge amount of work.  And, I think we're finding out that shootouts are difficult to do a good job on because there never is clearly one best winner, and if we start getting into things like picking multiple winners and such, it might make the shootout less meaningful.

mouser:
By the way, as far as reviews go, there are "reviews" and there are "shootouts".  The shootouts are A LOT of work.  Reviews aren't so bad.
--- End quote ---

basically our main full reviews are all shootouts, and as you say they are a LOT of work.  very few people can survive them with their sanity intact, and all who have attempted them have had a burnout period afterwards.

the single app "reviews" we have been calling "member mini-reviews"

we really do need to find a way to make it easier to do the full review shootouts..  there are several people working on a few of these now and they really take a lot out of you..

i had an idea recently:
what if we made the full shootout reviews a sort of product of the mini reviews?

for example, what if we said, ok this month we are going to do a full shootout of text editors. then asked users to write mini reviews and/or their comments about which program they think is best and why, with screenshots, movies, etc.

then it would be the job of one person to combine the most relevant aspects of the mini reviews to product a shootout summarizing them.  this is similar to the "What's the Best" child board in the review section (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?board=78.0).

zridling:
Something else might be to define the status reviews by type and approximate number of words:

Mini-Review: 500 words or less, focused on discussion of one program, namely it's latest release;

Review: 1500 word article that reviews in significantly more detail a specific release of a single program;

Shootout or "Review of..." [Archive tools, Downloaders, etc.]: 4000+ word review of four or more of the leading tools within a category, rather than an exhaustive, kitchen sink approach, which can still be done, but is perhaps unnecessary.

Hirudin:
[At this point, I haven't read the whole thread, I read too slow, and I'm too tired]

I'm with nudone on this one, in la la land I'd like to write a review or two. I've thought about writing reviews of the various DVD copying software I've been using lately. But every time I think about what I would write it turns into more of a tutorial, instead of a review.

Would it be appropriate to have a tutorial section on the site? I'd like to share my knowlege of DVD copying techniques if I could.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page