E-Prime 2.0 cloning, feature comparison

[Andrews, A.S.]

Thank you for your replies and links, David.

I think the standard version on a site licence may be suitable but
being able to ghost images would be a huge time saver for us, and it
is still not yet clear if this is possible.

Regards,

Tony.

On Mar 5, 4:38 pm, "David K McFarlane" <mcfar... at msu.edu> wrote:
> Tony,
>
> > Also, What are the extra features of the Pro version that are alluded
> > to? Are they really needed in a teaching environment where very little
> > interfacing is done and most of the time only a very few people
> > actually create experiments.
>
> This has been discussed at some length both on this list and at the PST
> Forum, you might try searching athttp://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/eprime.htmlorhttp://support.pstnet.com/forum, or try my little essay athttp://support.pstnet.com/forum/Topic914-13-1.aspx.
>
> Short answer, in your case I believe the "standard" edition will do fine.  
> Almost nobody needs the advanced features of Pro, however there are some
> incompatibilities between experiments saved as Pro vs. standard.  So just to
> allow for the widest compatibility between collaborating researchers, I
> advise all researchers to use Pro, but then to make sure to start writing
> each new experiment with the standard (not Pro) template.  But again, for
> basic classroom use I don't see any advantage to Pro.
>
>  -- David McFarlane, Professional Faultfinder
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "E-Prime" group.
To post to this group, send email to e-prime at googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to e-prime-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/e-prime?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---