BEAGLE REVIEW

Software Survey
What Can We Review for You?

(Posted April 16, 1999 · Issue 52)


Editor's note: As you'll have noted in our last issue, in our never-ending quest to enrich our content, HMS Beagle is seeking to expand our pool of software expertise by recruiting software reviewers. If you're interested in critiquing new programs, we'd like to hear from you.

But whether or not you want to review software, if you use software we'd like your opinion on the reviewer questionnaire below. These are guidelines for those reviewing software; we want to be sure that we're asking the questions that are most important to the people who actually use the programs (that is, you). Please take a moment to look over the reviewer guidelines below, and let us know if we're missing any crucial areas where you need information.

We're also soliciting suggestions for programs you'd like to see reviewed in the Beagle. When you send those suggestions, please provide the exact name of the program, and be sure to let us know its developer.

All comments and suggestions should be sent to Laurie Zamprelli. Thanks for the data!


Guidelines for Software Reviewers

Please provide the following information/answer the following questions in your review:

  1. Overview (no more than 200 words)
  2. Test platform
  3. Suitable platforms/file formats
  4. Type of software: (circle as many as you wish)

    • Mathematics/statistics
    • Graphics
    • Data analysis
    • Chemical drawing
    • Structural biology
    • Image analysis
    • Teaching tool/educational
    • Laboratory management
    • Miscellaneous utilities
    • Other (specify)

  5. Is program available online as a demo? (Provide details)
  6. Learning curve x-axis: time elapsed before you first used this software effectively
  7. Ease of data handling (scale of 1 to 10; 1 = worst; 10 = best)
  8. Simplicity and clarity of user interface (scale of 1 to 10; 1 = worst; 10 = best)
  9. Unique or impressive features
  10. Advantages over other similar programs
  11. Quirks you can live with
  12. Truly difficult drawbacks and shortfalls
  13. Customizability
  14. Quality of hardcopy documentation (scale of 1 to 10; 1 = worst; 10 = best)
  15. Quality of online help (scale of 1 to 10; 1 = worst; 10 = best)
  16. Are updates available?
  17. Software is most worth the investment for (type of user . . . )
  18. Additional comments (200 word maximum)
  19. System requirements
  20. Purchasing information



Tell us about your favorite software.

Previous Beagle Software Reviews
Genetwork: Detection of Potential Target Genes
in Silico?
Reviewed by Giovanni Lavorgna, Edoardo Boncinelli, Andreas Wagner, and Thomas Werner
(Posted March 19, 1999 ·  Issue 50)
MOLE: Molecular Graphics and Computation
for Windows
Reviewed by Xiaolin Liu
(Posted February 19, 1999 ·  Issue 48)
Nisus Writer 5.1.3
Reviewed by Marie-Claire Daou
(Posted January 22, 1998 ·  Issue 46)
Arcus QuickStat (Biomedical) 1.1
reviewed by Dylan Bulseco
(Posted December 11, 1998 ·  Issue 44)
Executor 2.0
reviewed by Steve Woods
(Posted November 13, 1998 ·  Issue 42)
SeqWeb 1.0 for GCG Wisconsin Package
reviewed by Dylan A. Bulseco
(Posted October 16, 1998 ·  Issue 40)

more