Great idea on the CAN-PLAN (and any subsequent) software review. A short application process with "winners" selected by MVP ranking is very reasonable. This ensures that any selected reviewers will be "known" to the PP community.
I would think 2-3 reviews would be sufficient, but this is really up to the software vendor as to how many packages they are willing to provide.
I think the reviews should be a free form dissertation. The reviewer can then focus on the pros and cons as they see them. It would make sense to include a header or footer describing the reviewer (possibly including some structure from the survey). I think that a more in depth review (than the survey) in the form of a dissertation might encourage other vendors to participate. Thoughts?
Either we can choose who reviews or, as I prefer, we can allow applications (to a cut-off date) and then select based on MVP ranking (or some other measure).
How many evaluations are enough ?
We then need to advise our reviewers how long they have and how to structure their evaluation. Suggest we use the software survey as a framework for this (I know, I still have to edit it up).
We also need to agree the format of and output from the reviews with the vendor. Do we give him raw data, or do we attempt to collate or even analyse it ?
If we agree on the above, suggest we post in the CAN-PLAN thread stating our intentions and soliciting reviewers. We can also ask James to post a notice on the homepage to the same effect (big banner "Free software")
Member for
22 years 11 monthsRE: Software Reviews
LOL... No.
Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems Inc. - Project Management Software, Project Planning Software
Member for
24 years 4 monthsRE: Software Reviews
Hey Bernard, are they paying you enough to work (?) this late every night ?
Member for
22 years 11 monthsRE: Software Reviews
Great idea on the CAN-PLAN (and any subsequent) software review. A short application process with "winners" selected by MVP ranking is very reasonable. This ensures that any selected reviewers will be "known" to the PP community.
I would think 2-3 reviews would be sufficient, but this is really up to the software vendor as to how many packages they are willing to provide.
I think the reviews should be a free form dissertation. The reviewer can then focus on the pros and cons as they see them. It would make sense to include a header or footer describing the reviewer (possibly including some structure from the survey). I think that a more in depth review (than the survey) in the form of a dissertation might encourage other vendors to participate. Thoughts?
Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems Inc. - Project Management Software, Project Planning Software
Member for
24 years 4 monthsRE: Software Reviews
Either we can choose who reviews or, as I prefer, we can allow applications (to a cut-off date) and then select based on MVP ranking (or some other measure).
How many evaluations are enough ?
We then need to advise our reviewers how long they have and how to structure their evaluation. Suggest we use the software survey as a framework for this (I know, I still have to edit it up).
We also need to agree the format of and output from the reviews with the vendor. Do we give him raw data, or do we attempt to collate or even analyse it ?
If we agree on the above, suggest we post in the CAN-PLAN thread stating our intentions and soliciting reviewers. We can also ask James to post a notice on the homepage to the same effect (big banner "Free software")
Mark