Special User Sections > General Review Discussion

Vote for what Review to do Next

<< < (7/9) > >>

GeorgeH:
I am a bit surprised that Image Editing is not listed.  You did a good job on Image Management so it seems natural that you would also include Image Editing.  I would expect that Paint Shop Pro and Photoshop would be included along with some freeware linke the Gimp and Photofiltre.

mouser:
it would be very nice to have a review of like, under $150 graphics editors..

as always for us it really comes down to finding someone willing to spend the time and effort to write a full shootout review.. they are long difficult things to write..

CodeTRUCKER:
How about using "Champions" (the ones who are the most enthusiastic) to do the leg-work? People tend to work harder for those things they really like.  These "Champions" could be the liaisons for contact and filling in the details.

[Edit - Clarification]

JavaJones:
Actually that is fairly similar to part of the structure being considered for the future of the review system. There is definitely thought and work being put toward some major improvements and structural considerations are certainly a fundamental part of that. So this kind of feedback is very valuable. As things move forward I'm sure more will be shared about the intended changes and - as ever on this site - feedback will be solicited in a broader fashion. For now in the earlier planning phases your comments will most definitely be taken into account.

- Oshyan

mouser:
Calvin, your idea has some real merit and like JavaJones says, part of the plan for the new review system is to break up the components so that some people may concentrate on filling in details and comments for one program, and some for another.

I like your idea of harnessing the fact that people naturally tend to champion one program or another, and the idea of having people who liason with the software authors; authors will also probably frequently want to be responsible for (and best informed for) talking about their own software.

The main puzzle that needs to be solved with this is to keep authors and others from saying their program is the best all the time and not giving an objective appraisal of strengths and weaknesses.

What I was thinking is that, while a main reviewer (or two) would be respoonsible for comparing and giving opinion on various performance of the apps, we could use people as you say to offer counter-opinions, rebuttal, and fill in details, feature matrices, etc.

In other words, I think we still need an objective reviewer(s) who can compare programs and critique them, and provide some consistency to the reviews, we could really benefit from a focused advocacy thing as you say to get more people involved in helping to write descriptions, elaborate feature matrices, and just in general make sure that each program is fairly treated and explain stuff and make sure the reviewer doesnt miss anything or get anything wrong.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page