No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Revvity Signals Notebook vs Screen comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Revvity Signals Notebook
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Data Preparation Tools (7th), Visual Collaboration Platforms (4th)
Screen
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
AWS Marketplace (205th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Revvity Signals Notebook and Screen aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Revvity Signals Notebook is designed for Data Preparation Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.0%.
Screen, on the other hand, focuses on AWS Marketplace, holds 0.2% mindshare, down 0.3% since last year.
Data Preparation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Revvity Signals Notebook2.0%
Alteryx Designer Cloud8.8%
Alteryx8.2%
Other81.0%
Data Preparation Tools
AWS Marketplace Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Screen0.2%
Stardog Enterprise Knowledge Graph Platform0.4%
VPN Server Solution using SoftEther VPN Server on Windows Server 20190.3%
Other99.1%
AWS Marketplace
 

Featured Reviews

Surjit Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Consulting Expert at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Speed and APIs have boosted scientific workflows but multi-environment deployment still needs work
In the product, they have started taking the right direction with Revvity Signals Notebook. They have added in-vitro analysis. That is, within Signals Notebook, you can define your experimental workflow steps. However, that is not very customizable. They have started adding those automation steps within in-vitro analysis. If you have a simple workflow, you can automate that within Signals Notebook itself using in-vitro analysis objects. You don't have to go to VitroVivo; you don't have to depend on Spotfire skill because VitroVivo requires your Spotfire skills. They can mature it because they have now started adding different plottings, such as P3 and P4 kind of plotting and curve fitting plotting. However, it is still at a very early stage. They can work on that area to mature their in-vitro analysis, to showcase all kinds of visualization and make their different steps more customizable. They have been adding more and more features in ADT. They can continue doing that with more and more functionality. For other functionality, they can also do things such as how they can combine multiple ADTs together. If we have to do a joining of two ADTs' data and putting it into other ADTs, or if we have to do a union of ADTs, if they can do it at the Signals Notebook level itself, then it will be quite flexible. Many tasks can be taken care of at the notebook level. You don't have to utilize the Signals Notebook API and then integrate it in your Python-based scripting or any other data pipeline scripting for doing this kind of task. Many things can be done at the notebook level. There are improvement areas in Signals Notebook itself, in the area of ADTs, combining data, and joining data. They can add the filtration as well. Currently, the limit in the ADT is 2,000 rows, so they can increase that limit to 10,000 and more than that. If somebody is joining one ADT to another ADT and then the result is getting saved into an ADT, then this row limitation should not come as a hurdle. For the stability of Revvity Signals Notebook itself, the rating is 9 out of 10. However, the only demerit of one feature of Signals Notebook is their deployment product. If you have multiple tenants, for example, one for the development area, another is for the QA area, another is for UAT, or then the production area, if you have multiple environments configured, and you want to deploy your experiments templates from one environment to another environment, that is a big pain. They have called it CTT functionality, and that is a very unstable functionality they have. It is one of the worst functionalities in Signals Notebook, that CTT tool they have. However, after getting complaints from the client side, they have started working, but the approach is still not that great. They don't have a seamless deployment application available from one tenant to another tenant. If I have to rate it, for deployment from one environment to another, I would be giving 2 or 3 out of 10.
Use Screen?
Leave a review
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Preparation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
896,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
20%
Pharma/Biotech Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
52%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Revvity Signals Notebook?
In the product, they have started taking the right direction with Revvity Signals Notebook. They have added in-vitro analysis. That is, within Signals Notebook, you can define your experimental wor...
What is your primary use case for Revvity Signals Notebook?
We have been using Revvity Signals Notebook for developing the scientific templates, different ADTs, then automating workflows using Signals with Trovivo. We have also used Inventa, and Signals Inv...
What advice do you have for others considering Revvity Signals Notebook?
The main benefits I receive from working with Revvity Signals Notebook are based on which tool you are moving to this tool from. That will create a benefit. My client was using legacy-based ELN bio...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Assessment
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Alteryx, Bright Data, SAS and others in Data Preparation Tools. Updated: May 2026.
896,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.