[MW Forums]

Contribute CS3 is an appealing and justifiable upgrade for users of Contribute 3 or earlier versions, especially if you want to run the program on an Intel-based Mac. In many ways, Contribute CS3 is the upgrade that Contribute 4 should have been, especially in terms of Intel compatibility. more

[DesignIT]

Funny thing, an author of a Contribute book rates Contribute, an author of a Flash Book Adobe Flash.
Don't you think authors have a vested interest to give a good rating, so that the new versions of their books will sell well?
Even better idea: Why don't you have Adobe review and rate CS3, I am sure the apps will get an even better rating.
<puzzled>

[kranbollin]

I am an administrator with an assignment to edit the content of certain web pages at my institution. This can be done from IE Windows using the 'Edit with Microsoft Word' command on the toolbar. There is no such functionality on Mac Safari, Camino or Firefox, not that I can find. Sounds like I am a target for Contribute CS3, but not at $149. I'll just go down the hall and borrow someone's Windows machine for a bit.

[moose_n_squirrel]

Quote:

---

Funny thing, an author of a Contribute book rates Contribute, an author of a Flash Book Adobe Flash.
Don't you think authors have a vested interest to give a good rating, so that the new versions of their books will sell well?
Even better idea: Why don't you have Adobe review and rate CS3, I am sure the apps will get an even better rating.
<puzzled>

---

What's the right way for them? Ban Mac experts (obviously biased) from reviewing new Macs and iPods, and turn the reviews over to Bill Gates and Paris Hilton?

[Jackie_Dove]

Quote:

---

Funny thing, an author of a Contribute book rates Contribute, an author of a Flash Book Adobe Flash.
Don't you think authors have a vested interest to give a good rating, so that the new versions of their books will sell well?
Even better idea: Why don't you have Adobe review and rate CS3, I am sure the apps will get an even better rating.
<puzzled>

---

Thanks for your inquiry about how Macworld chooses reviewers. I'm happy to share our policy, as it's designed to be transparent. The first criterion is that reviewers have no financial relationship with the vendor. The second is that reviewers are experts in the software they review and use it for various personal and professional purposes. The third is that reviewers are excellent writers. And the fourth is that reviewers are individuals of honesty and integrity who will call the shots as they see them. With those strict editorial requirements, it's inevitable that some of our reviewers are also book authors and that sometimes they will review the software that they've written books about. We consider that an asset, not a liability--if they wrote a book, then they know the program inside out. Its worth noting that there are also cases in which reviewers have written books about competing products. Moreover, reviews of all professional-level software are edited by several layers of disinterested parties: A tech editor is employed to spot errors and omissions; an independent Macworld editor edits every review and oversees the entire reviews process; and all Macworld editors have an opportunity to read every review before publication. The implication that a reviewer would give a product a good review in order to sell more books is untrue and simplistic. Macworld reviewers and editors have a vested interest in upholding the high standards of the magazine and in maintaining their credibility in the community. For both, honesty is the best policy.

[cebritt]

Who better to review a product than an expert on that product? Tom clearly knows all of the "nooks and crannies" of Contribute better than a casual reviewer. He also knows the limitations as well as features he thinks are missing. This level of knowledge can only be provided by someone who knows the product thoroughly.
If anything, it's been my experience that experts are tougher reviewers. How many reviews have you read that were so weak, you wonder if the reviewer even installed the program or just read the box?
FWIW, our church's web site uses Contribute 3 and just yesterday I called to ask if CS3 was an upgrade to 4 (...so 3 is newer than 4?). The Adobe rep I spoke with had no idea about the snippet feature Tom explained and one that we need to embed YouTube movies.