There have been a lot variations on this question here, which you can search under Questions: qualitative software.

In general, the conclusion is that almost all the qualitative software packages do the same things, but with some differences in their interfaces. In particular, ATLAS.ti, MAXQDA, and NVivo all have the same essential features, and anytime one of them introduces something new, the others typically implement it within a year.

If you are happy with MAX, it is unlikely that any of the others would offer you anything that much different.  

Nvivo is quickly becoming the default in my field. Atlas.ti is fairly popular too. I am pushing for people to use open source options, like QDAP, CAT, AQUAD, but I haven't settled on a particular choice yet.

There have been a lot variations on this question here, which you can search under Questions: qualitative software.

In general, the conclusion is that almost all the qualitative software packages do the same things, but with some differences in their interfaces. In particular, ATLAS.ti, MAXQDA, and NVivo all have the same essential features, and anytime one of them introduces something new, the others typically implement it within a year.

If you are happy with MAX, it is unlikely that any of the others would offer you anything that much different.  

I think ATLAS.ti gives you one interface in which you can code text, audio and video. When I last used MAXQDA, it couldn't do that, but they may have improved its functionality since.

Dear Mona,

I´ve been also using Maxqda, and in my field (social and political sciences) it´s the most popular software along with Nvivo (which is actually quite similar).

I think the decision depends on whether Maxqda suits your research questions and objectives or not. If you´re happy with it, I won´t advice switching to another sodtware.

Hope, it helps.