 |
 |
[log in to unmask] writes: << I, too, am disappointed to learn of Hyperresearch's weaknesses in coding video data. Although I am still coding text data with this software on my Mac, I had hoped to code video data as well. I hope that by the time I get there, you will have a version that functions smoothly and effectively. >> Please give it a shot in the version you have (I'm assuming 2.03). Tell us what you find unsatisfactory about it, and that will help us make sure that 2.5 *isn't* weak in coding video data. :-) One of the problems with HyperRESEARCH version 2.0's video capabilities stems from the unhappy fact that very few of our betatesters even attempted to use video, let alone in real-world studies. It passed the betatesting tests by our staff members simply because it did indeed seem to do what it was designed to do (you can select and code portions of video and audio data in 2.03, and replay those portions from a report -- provided you have "code on selection" turned *off* in the Options panel, a bug we discovered much later that interfered with video and graphic coding). And that is, in the end, all we can really test for here (due to limited manhours, with only 3 of us actively involved in betatesting; and also due to limited computer system configurations, as each of us only has a few different machines we can test on and the Real World has all *sorts* of strange computer configurations that can cause problems with software that wasn't tested for that specific configuration). We try to make up for our limitations by opening our betatest program up to just about anyone who expresses an interest in betatesting our software. And a few of our betatesters actually come through for us. One of the limitations in testing software is that you very often don't discover the software's weaknesses until it *is* being used with real-world data. More than anything right now, HyperRESEARCH needs feedback from you, the user, to help us improve the program in every way possible. We can make sure that the program allows users to do X, but only those users can tell us if the *way* HyperRESEARCH allows them to do X is the *right* way (or "best" or "most intuitive" or "easiest" or "most thorough" or whatever). Thus we discovered from feedback from users over the past year or so that the video coding capabilities of HyperRESEARCH were *not* as robust, precise, and easy to use as people expected. (The feedback has been fairly limited and sparse, as there don't seem to be many people using the video capabilities -- or if they are they aren't sharing their experiences, either good or bad with us.) We're attempting to address that in version 2.5, and will continue to address it (in version 3.0 and later) until we get it "right," by gosh! But we need our users' help and feedback (both good and bad!) to make sure we're on the right path. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm frustrated that some people are unhappy with certain aspects of HyperRESEARCH -- but don't bother to mention that to me or anyone else directly involved with ResearchWare. We can't fix something if we don't realize it's a problem. Now that we *do* know that the video capabilities of 2.03 leave something to be desired (because a very few people started telling us so), we are doing something about it. Best regards, Ann Dupuis ResearchWare, Inc. [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] http://www.researchware.com