Software for information storage and retrieval tested, evaluated and compared Part III — End‐user software

Abstract

In this series, specifications, properties and test results of microcomputer software for information storage and retrieval are listed and compared. This article is devoted to the previously defined category of end‐user software, sometimes also referred to as bibliographic formatting software. Eight different programs have been tested and assessed: Archivist, BIB/Search, Library Master, Notebook II, Papyrus, Pro‐Cite, The Ref‐Filer and Reference Manager. All programs run under MS‐DOS, though there are also Apple Macintosh versions for Pro‐Cite and Reference Manager. For each of the eight programs about 100 facts and test results are tabulated. All the programs are individually discussed as well.

Personal bibliographic systems (PBS) for the PC: A generic survey of features

“…In the more traditional approach, terms or sets can be combined using the Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) but many more recently developed systems (or program versions) use alternative procedures, often based on inventive artificial intelligence algorithms. Sieverts et al (1991aSieverts et al ( , 1991b1992a, 1992b, 1992c1993; call the whole range 'Information Storage and Retrieval (ISR)' software and distinguish between 'classical retrieval systems', 'end-user software', 'indexing programs', 'full-text retrieval programs', 'personal information managers', 'hypertext programs' and 'relevance ranking programs'. Furthermore, individual products may belong to several of these categories at the same time.…”

“…I shall discuss in a generic way a number of characteristics which individual PBS either do or do not feature. Most of them are available in at least one of the following lowcost (< £500) mainstream systems with which I am familiar: BiB/SEARCH, CDS-ISIS, Pro-Cite and Reference Manager, which all belong to the rather traditional 'classical retrieval systems' and 'end-user software' categories (Sieverts et al 1992a). I encountered some additional features in packages which are not strictly PBS (for example some CDROM interfaces) but which would do credit to any PBS system.…”

“…A product-indepen-dent table of desirable features is included as an appendix. For a discussion of the major PBS themselves I refer to a number of excellent review papers (Sieverts et al 1991a(Sieverts et al , 1991b1992a, 1992b, 1992c1993;Stigleman 1992Stigleman , 1993Stigleman , 1994Stigleman , 1996.…”

Review of Pro-Cite 3 for Windows

“…Applying various checklists for the evaluation of such packages − shows that ProCite ranks as a versatile, powerful package for fulfilling the dream of reference organization and the integration of citations into the preparation of manuscripts. Cibbarelli's Surveys gave ProCite version 2 an overall rank of 7.2 out of a possible 10 .…”

“…[3][4][5][6][7][8] ProCite along with its companion software BiblioLink-II has changed ownership a few times over the years and is now owned by Research Information Systems, a subsidiary of the Institute for Scientific Information. It survives as a flexible package on all platforms for collecting and indexing literature search results or drawers of reprints.Applying various checklists for the evaluation of such packages [9][10][11] shows that ProCite ranks as a versatile, powerful package for fulfilling the dream of reference organization and the integration of citations into the preparation of manuscripts. Cibbarelli's Surveys gave ProCite version 2 an overall rank of 7.2 out of a possible 10.…”