Ratings & Reviews   User Reviews  ( 18 )   Published Reviews  ( 6 )
Overall: 4.5 out of 5Installation: 3.5 out of 5Documentation: 3.5 out of 5
Individual Rating Results for AFNI

Review 18 of AFNI on Apr 19, 2010
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  4 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  3 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  2 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  The software requires intensive command-line operations, which might be troublesome for users who prefer GUIs.
Review 17 of AFNI on Oct 20, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  5 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  4 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  5 out of 5
Review 16 of AFNI on Oct 18, 2009
Version Reviewed:  NA
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  5 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  3 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  3 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  good powerful but difficult to learn
Review 15 of AFNI on Oct 18, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  5 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  4 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  5 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  AFNI requires some knowledge of C-shell scripting to use, but it is an extremely accessible tool. The program is customizable and has an active user community that are extremely prolific. It is an excellent imaging tool.
Review 14 of AFNI on Jun 22, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  3 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  3 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  2 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  It's cool, if you really enjoy unix. Essentially no usable UI. Math is valid. File naming conventions are... unique. Clings obtusely to .brik and .head files.
Review 13 of AFNI on Jun 22, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  4 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  4 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  5 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  This program requires a little more time to familiarize yourself with it than others, but there is a reward, in that it is extremely flexible.
Review 12 of AFNI on Jun 22, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  3 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  4 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  3 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  powerful tool, but difficult learning curve and poor documentation
Review 11 of AFNI on Jun 20, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  4 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  4 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  4 out of 5
Review 10 of AFNI on Mar 23, 2009
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  5 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  3 out of 5
Ratings/Long-term Prospects Comments:  possibly the most comprehensive analysis package available...although the learning curve is probably a little steeper than for some of the other packages, it is well worth the effort
Review 9 of AFNI on Nov 18, 2008
Overall Ease vs. Functionality:  5 out of 5
Download/Installation Ease:  5 out of 5
Documentation/Support Quality:  5 out of 5
Other Comments/Similar Tools:  good for use in MEG analysis with co-registration of anatomical fiducials
Next 10>>>