Comparison tables

[quixter]

Some software categories have many contenders and much discussion. It would really help to have tables comparing competing software programs on important criteria. What do you think?

[Bob]

Originally Posted by quixter

Some software categories have many contenders and much discussion. It would really help to have tables comparing competing software programs on important criteria. What do you think?

I find the Wikipedia software comparison tables useful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...re_comparisons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...nd_comparisons

Recently, I used one of these tables to help generate the information in a stub for Best Free Bibliographic Database Software

Personally, I feel that a comparison approach could be particularly useful for categories such as bibliography freeware where choice may depend largely on particular needs as well as software quality.

For instance, I think Jojoyee has handled this aspect of the Best Free PDF Tools rather successfully (thanks Jojo!).

[Jojoyee]

A good idea. Comparison table usually needs a few columns especially if you've more comparative items and it usually has a better view if you're using a wide screen monitor. Wonder if the article page in the TSA main site is designed to cater for that?

[PsychEroc]

I would also like to use a table design if I had some sort of template.

[quixter]

Bob,

Those were my thoughts exactly with regard to the Wiki tables in general and particularly biblographic software in particular.

Many in academia don't even bother to use biblio software in preparing their papers. The concept and the potential boost in research capacity seem easy to grasp, even with a couple cursory trials of biblio softwares. The concept seems dead simple, but the implementations are too often poorly realized. Thanks for starting that category review.

[PsychEroc]

Originally Posted by quixter

Many in academia don't even bother to use biblio software in preparing their papers. The concept and the potential boost in research capacity seem easy to grasp, even with a couple cursory trials of biblio softwares. The concept seems dead simple, but the implementations are too often poorly realized. Thanks for starting that category review.

I usually forget to use them until I finish the paper and have to prepare the references. Then, I scramble to find all the pdf's I downloaded and painstakingly transcribe their bibliographic info. Fortunately, both Mendeley and Quosa (free for me but not for others) will extract metadata from pdf's and output bibliographic references. -- Probably not the right thread for this discussion though.

[Jojoyee]

Originally Posted by PsychEroc

I would also like to use a table design if I had some sort of template.

There's an "Insert/Edit Table" button for use with the FCK Editor. A table with 100% width gives you about 670 pixels wide, falling within the white background of about 740 pixels wide in a TSA article page. For a table of 8 columns, you'll need at least 800 pixels if 100 pixels per column is needed, that will go beyond the white background.

In Wiki, I see from a page's source code which uses dynamic width of 100% such as <table class="wikitable sortable" style="width: 100%; table-layout: fixed; font-size: smaller; text-align: center;">. The 100% width can go up to 1,200 pixels or higher in this Wiki table style on a wide screen monitor.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by quixter

Many in academia don't even bother to use biblio software in preparing their papers. The concept and the potential boost in research capacity seem easy to grasp, even with a couple cursory trials of biblio softwares. The concept seems dead simple, but the implementations are too often poorly realized. Thanks for starting that category review.

Thanks Q (and PE & JJY),

Absolutely agree with you. What's more, the standard institutional choice seems to be between Reference Manager and EndNote. Since Thomson bought Reference Manager (to add to EndNote and ProCite) they've basically got a virtual commercial monopoly rather similar to those of Microsoft, Adobe etc.

I'm wondering how the freeware options stack up.

One obvious consideration is that different users in different fields will have rather different needs for accessing or transferring references from different online databases (as well as for annotating, organizing, sharing, formatting etc).

So I felt some sort of descriptive list/table is a good a way as any to start.

Now we need to try to stir up some user input - [ comments please! ]

Bob

[Jojoyee]

I like the table used in Table 1 Comparison matrix on free bibliography management application. A table like that easily takes about 750 to 850 pixels in width.

A table is often better than a list for clear and quick comparison among the features available to the applications.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Jojoyee

I like the table used in Table 1 Comparison matrix on free bibliography management application. A table like that easily takes about 750 to 850 pixels in width.

A table is often better than a list for clear and quick comparison among the features available to the applications.

Hi Jojo

For basic text descriptions of different products I really liked the layout you used for 20 Places To Look For Free Wallpapers. I think that's a very valuable option.

The sort of comparison table you link to above is much more detailed and could be used in conjunction (eg further down the page). Personally, I think templates for both types of table could be useful to us in the medium term [just my 2c].

Bob