 | May 28 2009 |
NEURON I now realize that I have to use Endnote again. I love both Bookends and Sente, and Bookends has been my workhorse for the past 3 years. However, because nearly all of my colleagues use Word and Endnote (mostly on PCs), its almost unbearable collaborating on documents if I use Bookends to generate a bibliography. My main question before I plunk down $99 for the Endnote upgrade is the compatibility between PC and Mac Endnote-generated bibliographies in MS Word files. Specifically, if someone generates an Endnote bibliography on a PC in word, then sends me the references to import into my Mac Endnote, can I work with this Word document seamlessly using my Mac and Endnote? Any help is greatly appreciated. If I will have difficulty using a PC Endnote-bibliography with my Mac Endnote, then it will not be worth buying. I'd rather continue my collaborative struggles with Bookends.
(Version X2.0.1) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Jun 2 2009 |
MARTINBB I think it depends on what you mean by "work with". As I understand, it, Endnote uses the unique ID number from each entry in its database when generating a bibliography (it goes to the database and fetches the information that matches the unique ID that is stored in the temporary citation). If you have a different database from that of your colleague, you will almost certainly have different unique IDs for each entry (the unique IDs are generated automatically by Endnote when you first enter the information for the journal, book, or whatever it is). Bookends is a lot more flexible, as it will use other information (such as the title) to match temporary citations to the entries in the database. If you want to exchange references with someone, I don't see why you need to use a Word document. The database entries could be exported direct from Endnote into an XML or other file that can be imported into Endnote or Bookends. As I say, I think it depends on what you want to do.
(Version X2.0.1) | |
| Jun 6 2009 |
NEURON Thanks, that info helps. I absolutely have to use Word. *All* - not most - of my colleagues use Word. I write scientific and medical manuscripts, and for every manuscript we pass back and forth at least 10 revisions, all with tracked changes. I hate using Word, I much prefer Scrivener then either Pages or Nisus, but that's the way it is. I guarantee every biomedical writer uses Word/Endnote if they have to collaborate on a manuscript. When I use Bookends and someone sends me a revision of a manuscript with a significant amount of tracked changes as well as changes in the references, Bookends has major problems with un-scanning and then re-scanning. The only way I can get this to work is usually by losing all the tracked changes. Its very frustrating. Anyways, I ended up buying Endnote X2.0.1, and to be honest, its working quite well. It imported my 2500 ref library, including linked PDFs, without a hitch. Its much quicker than Bookends. It hasn't crashed on me yet after a week of use on its own, without CWYW. I don't know if CWYW is causing Word 2008 to crash a lot, because Word 2008 is a crash-fest on its own anyways. Besides its ability to spontaneous quitting several times an hour, Word 2008 is the only program that will freeze my entire Mac and make me hard-restart (MacBook 13 inch 2.16 GHz 2 MB RAM OSX 10.5.7).
(Version X2.0.1) | |
 | Feb 21 2009 |
DRBARNES Absolutely Awful - Sente seems much more stable; it doesn't have Cite While you Write (CWYW), but then again EndNote's CWYW crashes virtually every time anyway. Having previously used EndNote fairly reliably on a PC, I bought it for Mac before the 'X versions'. That version rarely worked, but given the hype about the newest refined X2 version and CWYW fixes, I paid again for the latest update (another £75 or so!). It is every bit as buggy, and has virtually no innovation over previous versions. In contrast, I am now looking at Sente, which lacks the much hyped integration with Pages, but will produce bibliographies for Pages outwith the application itself after inserting easil formatted citations. Sente also features a much more intuitive interface, web search facilities that actually work, and a great system for linking downloaded PDF files to the citation database. It can be a little slow opening my 50k database, but not intolerably. Unlike EndNote, it also has a trial.
(Version X2.0.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Oct 29 2008 |
NONTROPPO Horrible interface, buggy, poorly featured, slow program updates. The only reason Endnote exists is that many people don't research the software they buy and Endnote lives off its name (our Department buys a site licence only for this and not other better options). Both Bookends and Sente are significantly better, and their developers are very receptive to input.
(Version X2.0.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Oct 29 2008 |
LEV FYI, Bookends sucketh not. Nor does Sente. Either are way ahead of EndNote with better online functionality and better customer support. EndNote is a dinosaur; as medics are no longer allowed to write on patients' notes, it's T.F. BUNDY. (= "Totally f***** but unfortunately not dead yet.")
(Version X2.0.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Sep 3 2008 |
SUNBURN This is totally ludicrous. These clowns want $100 a year for upgrades to piece of software that STILL sucks even after years of upgrades. This is PC software with a bad UI and mediocre functionality. I'm done with what is essentially an annual subscription. Right now, for HALF the price of the _upgrade_, I can get a bundle which includes Bookends. Even if Bookends also sucks (I haven't tried it yet, but I'm about to buy it anyway), there is virtually no way that EndNote X2 is twice as good as Bookends. Of course, there is no way in heaven or hell that anyone from the developer will ever see this. ISI is a lumbering hulk to whom "customer service" means nothing unless you are a huge on-line library or publisher.
(Version X2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Apr 10 2008 |
FLORI I have been using Endnote for many many years. The last stable, and reliable (with Word), version was v.5 on OS9. None of the OSX versions have been properly fixed for bugs and the latest (10.0.2) is unstable in both Mac and Windows versions. Even a successive search enquiry can crash it. If you are using Word (2004 or X) and cite-while-you write, keep regular backups! I had a large scientific review document completely corrupt on me. Endnote has increasingly added new and attractive features, but never seems to provide adequate bug-fixes for each version. Rather a new (and to be paid for) version is released with additional features. My colleagues and I have been hit with so many of these upgrade charges - always hoping in vain that things will improve - that we are seriously looking at alternatives. What are the chances that v. XI will be any better?
(Version 10.0.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jul 19 2007 |
LEV Corrupted my library, crashed itself repeatedly, crashed Word repeatedly, wouldn't work with Mellel, didn't attach pdfs properly... oh, I could go on. I only revisited this achingly terrible app because of the need to collaborate with a colleague; it proved easier, quicker, better and cheaper (WAY cheaper, time being money) to convert said colleague to Bookends. The whole experience was like meeting an ex in the street and thinking "Wow, was that a lucky escape when we split up." ISI should be ashamed of themselves, but I don't think shame is in their corporate repertoire.
(Version 10.0.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Apr 1 2006 |
ANON BUD Two words: SLOW, EXPENSIVE Using a 1ghz PowerBook G4 it took over five minutes to add just one reference to a brand new database using the online search method. Scrolling is extremely slow. Images and objects are not added to references. I'm new to this, but I am also new to Bookends and find Bookends to be extremely fast, low learning curve, works with Mellel seamlessly. It only took me thirty seconds to search and add a reference from the Library of Congress site. All this, and it is almost a third the price!
(Version 9.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Sep 16 2005 |
GRRRRRRR I tried many times, but one conclusion: EndNote 9 don't want to open on my Mac OS Tiger... Quit unexpectedly... each time. other guys have the same problem?
(Version 9.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Sep 2 2005 |
NICKEL Downloaded demo of version 9 and it won't convert my EndNote 6 library despite saying that it can. It appears to go through the process, but then errors out saying that it cannot save the file. I have tried creating a new copy of my library in EN6 before converting, and that hasn't helped. Beware, their tech support is a toll call, you will wait on hold indefinitely, and then most likely have to leave voice mail and wait for a call back. I'm still waiting.
(Version 9.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 2 2005 |
NICKEL Okay, finally heard back from Thomson. I had to run the 'recover library' command from within EN6. I was then able to convert the new library to EN9. Would have been nice if this was mentioned somewhere in the troubleshooting documentation.
(Version 9.0) | |
| Aug 31 2005 |
VITALY this is a good release, fast and stable. BUT it should not have been a paid new version. instead, this should have been an update for v8 which is less than a year old and is incredibly buggy. the company seems to produce one major release, charge for it, and make it so full of bugs that the users have no choice but buy the next version
(Version 9.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Nov 3 2004 |
BART SEFTON I used Endnote on a Mac for years when it was sold by Niles. I loved it. It was priced right, versatile and was well supported. Then they sold it to Thomson. Then PubMed downloads didnt work and I paid $99 to upgrade to version 6. Only then did I discover that you couldnt format an RTF document with version 6. That made EndNote 6 worthless to me. To get this feature that had always been available before, would cost another $99 for version 7. I switched to Bookends, which is great, and has great support. Reference Miner is also a great utility. I think the new EndNote business model is to charge $99 a year to maintain compatability. Its not worth money.
(Version 7.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Oct 30 2002 |
HAWKER This is a great piece of software, but it could be improved by taking advantage of services and by integration with wordprocessors other than M$ Word.
(Version 6.0.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
Main
