Reading and annotating a document are second citizens with MaxQDA. That might be fine for some people whose intention is an extensive coding of text. The whole focus of Maxqda is the code (=tags): not on texts and concepts.
Nvivo vs maxqda software#
But, the software has some design directions that made it not so convenient for my use.
As it turns out, the application (the code) is brilliantly done. If one counts the number of features embedded into MaxQDA, they could be twice more than that of the AtlasTi.īut, as I dig deeper, I find some disconcerting worries. But, to be honest, I was totally in love with the interface of the Maxqda. It looks like a Windows application on the mac, in contrast to Atlas which is a truly Mac app. Even if there is a huge mess of menus and functions, I love the whole interface of Maxqda. MaxQDA is also extremely polished and clean. In addition, unlike the other two, Max can import RTFD files. Dragging a bunch of text files, NVIVO took more than 30 minutes Atlas imported them in about 12 minutes: Max did it in just over 1 minute. I was impressed how fast it imports the documents in comparison to NVIVo specifically. Maxqda is much faster when importing documents. These two QDA applications are truly amazing. The real comparison turns out to be between AtlasTi and MaxQDA.
Nvivo vs maxqda pdf#
Indeed, if not for the dysfunctional pdf reader, I won’t have to pay for QDA software as my university already offers NVIVO for free. Therefore, the easiest of the decision was to dismiss NVIVO. The pdf reader lacks navigation features such as the bookmark and outline. The Pdf reader is mediocre: not that functional.
NVIVO is generally the slowest of all the three and has the least features.
I spend a couple of days learning about each of the software: trying with sample projects, watching tutorials etc. I was fascinated by these two applications, in addition to NVIVO.
0 kommentar(er)
