TidBITS#514/24-Jan-00
=====================

  This week we finally conclude our notes from Macworld Expo, with
  Adam taking a close look at rationale behind the market research
  numbers Steve Jobs shared during his keynote address. Contributing
  Editor Matt Neuburg joins us with a review of Papyrus, a
  bibliography management program that offers numerous features to
  academics everywhere. In the news, we cover Apple's $183 million
  Q1 profit and Connectix's free update to RAM Doubler 9.

Topics:
    MailBITS/24-Jan-00
    Doing the Numbers with Jobs
    Best Footnote Forward: Papyrus 8.0.7

<http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/TidBITS-514.html>
<ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/issues/2000/TidBITS#514_24-Jan-00.etx>

Copyright 2000 TidBITS Electronic Publishing. All rights reserved.
   Information: <info@tidbits.com> Comments: <editors@tidbits.com>
   ---------------------------------------------------------------

This issue of TidBITS sponsored in part by:
* READERS LIKE YOU! You can help support TidBITS via our voluntary <- NEW!
   contribution program. Special thanks this week to Paul Hess,
   Martin Gleeson, and Jeremy Quinn for their generous support!
   <http://www.tidbits.com/about/support/contributors.html>

* APS CD-RW: SO HOT IT'S COOL! For blazing fast CD burns, check <---- NEW!
   out the hot APS Tech CD-RW 12x4x32x, which can toast a complete
   CD in 6 minutes. Only $369.95 today! <http://www.apstech.com/>

* WinStar Northwest Nexus. Visit us at <http://www.nwnexus.com/>.
   Internet business solutions throughout the Pacific Northwest.

* Small Dog Electronics -- Freehand 8.0 Upgrade only $69! <---------- NEW!
   Factory Refurbished Graphite Apple Studio Display 17": $399!
   Sophisticated Circuits Desktop Dialer (ADB): $25
   For Details: <http://www.smalldog.com/> -- 802/496-7171

* OUTPOST.COM: More than just products -- Service. Visit for a
   tremendous selection of products: computer hardware, software,
   and accessories, plus consumer electronics with FREE OVERNIGHT
   SHIPPING. We deliver. <http://www.tidbits.com/tbp/outpost.html>

* NEW RELEASES!! Mac OS 9, iBook, FileMaker 5, InDesign - All <------ NEW!
   are available on video and CD-ROM. See product descriptions
   at: <http://www.macacademy.com/tidbits.html>
   ---> or call 800/527-1914

* NEW Farallon HOMELINE ETHERNET & USB ADAPTERS provide <------------ NEW!
   connectivity for Macs, PCs & DSL/Cable modems with Ethernet or
   USB to share a single Internet connection, multi-player games,
   printers & files. <http://www.farallon.com/tidbits/homeline>

* Aladdin Systems: NEW STUFFIT DELUXE 5.5 NOW SHIPPING!! <----------- NEW!
   Faster Compression & Expansion, More File Formats! Send Self-
   Extracting Archives and Zip Archives to PCs! SPECIAL DISCOUNT
   OFFER AT: <http://www.aladdinsys.com/deluxe/tidbitsoffer.html>
   ---------------------------------------------------------------

MailBITS/24-Jan-00
------------------

**Connectix Releases Free RAM Doubler 9 Update** -- Perhaps the
  most essential utility that fell prey to compatibility problems
  with the release of Mac OS 9 was Connectix's RAM Doubler 8, which
  replaces Apple's built-in virtual memory scheme with alternative
  methods of increasing the amount of memory available to
  applications. It does this by first reclaiming unused memory from
  other applications, then by compressing memory in use so it takes
  less space, and finally by swapping the contents of memory out to
  disk. (See "Free RAM Doubler 8 Update" in TidBITS-439_ and "RAM
  Doubler 2" TidBITS-351_ for more details.) Connectix has finally
  released a free update to RAM Doubler 9 that adds no new features
  but makes RAM Doubler compatible with Mac OS 9. If you've been
  missing RAM Doubler since upgrading to Mac OS 9, it's well worth
  downloading. Unfortunately, Connectix also stated that it has no
  plans to update the popular SpeedDoubler 8 or Surf Express Deluxe
  for Mac OS 9. [ACE]

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=04992>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=00837>
<http://www.connectix.com/products/rd9.html>
<http://www.connectix.com/support/macos9.html>


**Apple Posts $183 Million Profit** -- Apple Computer posted a
  $183 million profit for its first fiscal quarter of 2000. Apple's
  unit shipments were up 46 percent compared to the same quarter a
  year ago: Apple sold nearly 1.4 million systems during the quarter
  (including 700,000 iMacs and 235,000 iBooks) and 51 percent of
  those sales were to international customers. Apple has $3.6
  billion in cash and short term investments, and ended the quarter
  with less than one day of inventory on hand. Although these
  numbers are quite healthy, they would have been $178 million
  without some mammoth one-time events. Apple sold five million
  shares of ARM Holdings for a total gain of $101 million, took a
  net restructuring charge of $6 million, and allotted $90 million
  dollars in "executive compensation" for turnaround-leader Steve
  Jobs, who was given his own Gulfstream V jet and options to buy 10
  million shares of Apple stock. That's not bad pay for a part-time
  job. [GD]

<http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2000/jan/19q1results.html>


**Poll Results: Swimming Towards Aqua** -- After only one live
  preview, Apple's new Aqua interface for Mac OS X has been branded
  everything from the "Jolly Rancher interface" to the equivalent to
  the misfire that was New Coke. Now, TidBITS readers have filed
  their opinions in last week's poll, when we asked, "How do you
  feel about Apple's new interface for Mac OS X?" From a total of
  1,005 responses, 40 percent said they loved the new look; 34
  percent were positively wishy-washy and said it was okay; 22
  percent said "I'm worried"; and only 4 percent expressed outright
  hatred. Although Mac OS X isn't scheduled to ship for another six
  months or so, it looks like many users will be happy to go with
  the flow. [JLC]


**Quiz Preview: Sending Email Attachments to Windows** -- It's
  quiz time again, and this week's question is one that has vexed
  many a newbie (and plenty of veteran users). Attaching files to
  outgoing email messages intended for Mac users is usually no
  sweat, especially for people using modern email programs. But
  what's the best encoding method to use when sending a file to a
  Windows user via email? It's a tricky question, and if you test
  your knowledge on our home page, the results page will explain the
  correct answer. [JLC]

<http://www.tidbits.com/>


Doing the Numbers with Jobs
---------------------------
  by Adam C. Engst <ace@tidbits.com>

  At the beginning of his keynote address at Macworld Expo in San
  Francisco, Steve Jobs spent about five minutes going over Apple's
  numbers, primarily those garnered from market research. These
  carefully chosen statistics aren't necessarily dry economic
  figures but rather reflect how Apple is justifying the company's
  current strategies and directions. Follow along as I look at what
  the numbers mean to the Mac community and why Jobs wanted to share
  these particular results.

  First though, for those that wondered about this emphasis on
  statistics at Macworld, remember that the keynote address is
  heavily attended by the mainstream media, and Jobs understands the
  power of speaking to that audience. Put bluntly, numbers are easy
  to write down and remember, so mainstream journalists can easily
  assemble a quick story around them. Jobs's careful presentation of
  positive results before anything else in the keynote was clearly
  aimed at generating positive press. Only a couple years ago
  mainstream media regularly shredded Apple in print; Jobs wants to
  ensure a solid footing with the press, and there's no better way
  to do that than feed journalists good numbers in a forum where
  they can't even ask questions.


**Portable & Consumer Popularity** -- Jobs focused first on the
  iBook and the PowerBook, which together garnered 11 percent of the
  U.S. retail market share in November. Although he didn't split out
  the iBook's numbers specifically at the time, Jobs did comment
  that according to PC Data, the iBook was the top-selling portable
  in the U.S. retail market in both October and November. Stating
  the numbers in this way met two goals - it emphasized the
  popularity of the iBook (in the face of the now-rote criticism
  heaped on the iBook for its curvaceous looks and moderate
  specifications) and gave a nod to the continuing strength of the
  eight-month old PowerBook line, perhaps as a jab at the widespread
  rumors that new PowerBooks would be introduced at the show.

  Also aimed at answering iBook criticism was Apple's research
  showing that 56 percent of iBooks purchased were the first
  portable computer in the home. That number helps support Apple's
  approach of making a consumer-level laptop, a market whose needs
  computer makers - including Apple - haven't previously addressed.

  With the numbers released last week in Apple's quarterly report,
  we can see even more of where Apple's business is heading. Apple
  shipped nearly 1,377,000 Macs in its first fiscal quarter of 2000;
  of those, 700,000 were iMacs and 235,000 were iBooks. That's a
  total of 935,000 candy-colored Macs, or about 68 percent of total
  sales, which shows that the lion's share of Apple's business is
  coming from consumer-oriented systems. Of course, Apple's
  professional-level Power Macintosh G4 line has suffered from
  supply problems (Jobs shared no research numbers regarding the
  G4s), and the current PowerBook G3 had to fight both being the
  oldest member of the Mac line and those rumors of imminent
  replacement. Perhaps next quarter's results will show movement
  back toward the professional line. Still, it's hard to argue with
  Apple's continued focus on the consumer market that brought the
  company back to profitability and still sustains it.

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=05615>


**New to the Mac** -- Next, Jobs turned his attention to who is
  buying iBooks and iMacs. First-time computer buyers made up 11
  percent of iBook buyers, and 17 percent switched from Windows-
  based PCs. The numbers for the iMac were even higher, with 30
  percent first-time computer buyers and 14 percent Windows PC
  converts. That makes more than a quarter of iBook buyers and
  almost half of iMac buyers converts to the Mac platform, which
  Apple likes to highlight. Plus, Apple claimed that 67 percent of
  iMac buyers never considered another computer.

  Many media reports characterized Apple's recovery initially as
  coming entirely from pent-up demand from the Macintosh faithful,
  but with this large percentage of iBook and iMac buyers coming
  from outside the fold, Apple can show that although existing
  Macintosh owners are remaining loyal to the platform, the iMac and
  iBook are responsible for bringing hundreds of thousands of new
  users to the Macintosh. That growth in customer base is
  significant in numerous ways: it plays well with the stock analyst
  crowd; it makes for a good story for the mass media (and hints
  that additional Macintosh coverage might be worthwhile); it
  encourages developers to support the Macintosh; and it reassures
  existing Macintosh owners that they're by no means alone.


**What They're Using** -- Jobs then focused on Apple's high-
  profile hardware features: AirPort wireless networking and the
  digital video capabilities in the iMac DV. Sixteen percent of
  iBook owners have installed AirPort cards, which strikes me as
  high, given that AirPort cards are only useful either in multiple
  iBook situations or in conjunction with AirPort Base Stations.
  Despite the ease of networking the Macintosh in the past, Apple
  has never done much to promote features like LocalTalk or Personal
  File Sharing, so it's good to see them emphasizing AirPort. Tonya
  and I have been using an iBook with an AirPort Base Station for
  several weeks, and I have to say that wireless networking is
  utterly addictive, despite some annoying problems with the current
  AirPort software.

  On the other hand, Jobs said that 10 percent of iMac DV owners
  have made a digital movie, and another 22 percent say that they
  plan to do so. He obviously thought these numbers were impressive
  enough to share, although I'm somewhat surprised, since they feel
  low to me given the emphasis Apple has placed on digital video and
  the price of the iMac DV. If nothing else, the fact that Jobs had
  to mention the iMac DV owners who _planned_ to use iMovie
  indicates that even Apple may be bothered that only 10 percent
  actually have used iMovie for real.

  Given the overwhelming interest in digital video in the TidBITS
  poll on the topic (where 75 percent of respondents said they found
  digital video moderately or very appealing) and the related
  discussion on TidBITS Talk, I would have expected the number of
  iMac DV owners who had already made a movie to be larger.

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=05622>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tlkthrd=814>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=05601>

  Why the low numbers? Despite iMovie's ease of use, it requires an
  expensive digital camcorder, and people who already have
  traditional camcorders may have difficulty justifying the purchase
  of a new camcorder as well as the iMac DV. And even then, messing
  around with digital video requires that most precious commodity:
  time. For example, we have an elderly JVC camcorder that uses
  VHS-C tapes. As new parents, Tonya and I find this setup more
  useful than digital video in some ways, since we can just
  videotape Tristan and then send the videotape to relatives to
  share amongst themselves. The process is fast and simple, and
  although we could produce better quality movies with iMovie, we
  barely have time to upload digital stills of Tristan to the Web,
  much less edit digital movies of him. At least Apple's iDisk and
  QuickTime-streaming-capable HomePage iTool will go a long way
  toward eliminating the other significant limitation of large
  QuickTime movies: distribution.


**iT's the iNternet** -- Jobs next reeled off several numbers
  aimed at justifying the Internet focus of the iBooks and iMacs,
  saying that 90 percent of iBook owners were on the Internet and a
  full 70 percent had purchased goods and services online. The
  comparable iMac numbers were slightly different, with 93 percent
  on the Internet - 62 percent having connected on the first day of
  ownership - and 57 percent purchasing on the Internet. I suspect
  the lower percentage of iMac owners purchasing online has to do
  with iMacs attracting users with less elastic wallets and less
  previous experience with the Internet. After all, 11 percent of
  iBook buyers are new to computers, whereas 30 percent of iMac
  buyers purchased the iMac as their first computer.

  In short, these statistics about Internet use and purchasing say
  that not only are iBook and iMac owners almost certain to get on
  the Internet, they also spend money on the Internet. That might
  help identify Apple as a "dot com" company to Wall Street
  analysts, and the research might also encourage large Web sites to
  design for Mac users as well as Windows users. I still
  periodically receive email from people asking for
  Macintosh/Internet usage statistics to help convince their Web
  designers to make a site more accessible for Mac users- hopefully
  these numbers will help.

  Finally, Jobs also noted that the online Apple Store did $300
  million in sales in the last quarter, giving it a $1 billion
  annual sales rate. Since overall revenues for the quarter were
  $2.34 billion, that means about 13 percent of Apple's business
  comes directly through the Internet. I'd be interested to hear how
  many first-time iMac and iBook buyers purchased through the Apple
  Store, and what the comparable numbers were for PC-converts.


**The Message Is the Message** -- Dirty secret time. Many
  companies, especially large ones that devote significant resources
  to their marketing efforts, create "marketing messages" to go
  along with product launches or other marketing efforts. In
  meetings with the press and in subsequent public presentations to
  customers, the goal is not so much to show the product, but to
  instill the marketing message so deeply that it becomes "the word"
  on that product, both in the media and among users. I've been in
  numerous press briefings where I just wanted to interrupt the
  oh-so-earnest presentation and say, "Yes, I understand that your
  goal is to provide a best-of-class product that meets the needs of
  today's users and supports all of Apple's latest technologies in a
  variety of candy-coated colors. That's true for everyone. Now can
  we talk about your program's new features?"

  The problem with this approach is that good journalists and
  thoughtful users like to make up their own minds and dislike
  feeling manipulated. But it doesn't have to work that way. A
  skillful marketer - and that describes Steve Jobs if it describes
  anyone - understands that a better approach is to provide
  carefully selected raw materials to let people form their own
  opinions. By providing more detailed results than is common, Jobs
  managed to guide opinion in a positive direction while avoiding
  the heavy-handed marketing message approach. It seems to have
  worked - Apple has received positive press and word of mouth in
  abundance since Jobs's keynote.


Best Footnote Forward: Papyrus 8.0.7
------------------------------------
  by Matt Neuburg <matt@tidbits.com>

  Throughout my Classics career, the hardest part of scholarly
  writing was managing the bibliography. My thesis was particularly
  nightmarish. Like most humanities Ph.D. theses, it involved an
  extended critique of the existing scholarship - a complete history
  of claims and contradictions on hundreds of disputed issues. I
  maintained a vast collection of oversize note cards with holes
  round the outside; a v-shaped punch and some knitting needles
  helped me retrieve references bearing on a given matter. My
  typescript had to follow precisely the official style sheet on
  footnotes and citations, lest the Dreaded Thesis Secretary reject
  the whole thing on formal grounds.

  I could really have used a program like Papyrus, from Research
  Software Design.

<http://www.rsd.com/>

  I've never used any commercial bibliography management software,
  so before studying Papyrus I imagined an ideal system that might
  have helped me with my thesis and other writings, and decided that
  it should:

* Act as a database for entry, storage, and flexible retrieval of
  references.

* Do the textual "arithmetic" to combine the fields of each
  reference into a canonically formed citation.

* Integrate with a word-processor to insert citations.

* Act as, or integrate with, note-taking software.

  Papyrus does all these, and adds a fifth function, obviously
  valuable in this computer age, but which hadn't occurred to me:

* Automatically import text references culled from online and
  CD-based bibliographical databases.

  I'll discuss Papyrus under each of these heads in turn.


**The Database** -- Papyrus's database is absolutely splendid. The
  interface is clean and intuitive, revolving around two chief
  window types: the Reference, where you edit individual references,
  and the Group, which lists a subset of the stored references.
  There is powerful use of such devices as drag & drop, double-
  clicking in a window to open a related window, keyboard
  navigation, and other well-implemented conveniences too numerous
  to mention.

  Papyrus knows which fields are relevant to each type of material
  (a book, an article in a journal, an article in a book, and so
  on), and ingeniously presents these as required fields, optional
  fields, and fields so rarely needed that they are hidden unless
  you ask to see them. Text fields are styled and WorldScript-savvy.
  You can add fields and material types, but you probably won't need
  to.

  As you edit, Papyrus's "intelligence" saves you from errors and
  unnecessary work. For example, it knows which fields might repeat
  (there might be more than one author, for instance) and
  automatically provides a new blank when you fill one in; if you
  omit the comma in the author field (because you've forgotten that
  Papyrus expects last name, comma, first name) it prompts you; it
  distinguishes automatically between a first name and a first
  initial, understands a further comma to mean an appendage after
  the last name ("Dumas, Alexandre, Jr."), capitalizes names for
  you, and so forth.

  Papyrus's database is truly relational, in a transparent,
  automatic way. Thus, for example, as you're entering entire
  references, Papyrus is gathering authors' names into a separate
  internal structure. Therefore, additional information can be
  associated with an author; plus, you can change a name and
  propagate that change to every reference that uses it. Also, this
  permits intelligent lookup: having entered an author in one
  reference, it suffices to type the first few letters of that name
  in another.

  You can assemble groups manually or through a query, and both
  groups and queries can be saved. Even more important, since it's
  easy to save and open a group listing _one_ project's references,
  you're likely to have just a single database comprising references
  for _all_ your projects - so that you take advantage of Papyrus's
  relational capabilities across all of them at once. It's a
  brilliant architecture.


**Building a Citation** -- Papyrus constructs citations from
  fields by way of a Format, which is a set of instructions you
  enter partly through a series of dialogs and sub-dialogs, and
  partly through a grep-like formula describing the desired output.
  So, for example, to say that authors should be shown last name
  plus comma plus initials with period space after each, you drill
  down to a dialog and check the desired options; but to say that an
  article should appear as author, period, space, journal name in
  italics, comma, series if there's a series, volume number in bold,
  and so forth, you build a formula which looks rather like a Nisus
  PowerFind expression. Papyrus comes with a large number of
  formats, corresponding to various citation styles such as American
  Medical Association, Forestry Chronicle, Chicago Manual, and
  Turabian; you can use or modify one of these, or construct your
  own from scratch.

  This is fine in principle, but I worry that the means to describe
  the desired output lacks sufficient generality. Papyrus seems to
  assert that it knows best what you should want to do: stay within
  these limitations and you'll be fine. Personally, I prefer
  programs that put the power into the hands of the user. The
  problem stems from three causes:

* You can't circumvent Papyrus's "intelligence," which is
  sometimes more simple-minded than reality. For instance, you have
  no way to say that the proper abbreviated form of Yuri Gagarin's
  first name is "Yu." (and if you actually enter his first name as
  "Yu.", Papyrus strips the period, thinking it's his whole first
  name).

* You can't enter an option unless a dialog provides for it. For
  instance, there's no way to say that the first of multiple authors
  should have the first name written out but subsequent authors
  should have the first name abbreviated.

* The language of the output formula is weak. For example, there's
  no if-then-else construct; so you can't say that if a book's
  abbreviated-title field is defined, it should be used, and
  otherwise its normal title field should be used. This is almost
  shocking when you consider the extensive prior art for letting the
  user express just this sort of thing (such as Helix abacus
  dataflow diagrams, FileMaker calculation fields).


**Word Processor Integration** -- At a basic level, Papyrus works
  with just about any word processor. You can copy and paste (or
  drag & drop) a reference in Papyrus into a word processor
  document; the result is a citation in a particular format. And you
  can export an entire group of references as citations in a
  particular format, as MacWrite or RTF, which most word processors
  can import.

  But if your word processor is Nisus Writer or Microsoft Word, both
  of which are scriptable, Papyrus is much smarter. Your document
  can contain coded abbreviations for references, like this: [[6]],
  meaning your reference whose ID number is 6. When you're done
  writing, Papyrus automatically examines your document and
  constructs, based on these abbreviations, both the citations and
  the bibliography. For example, if [[6]] means my Lysistrata
  translation, then Papyrus will substitute "(Neuburg 1992)" for it,
  and will include the full citation in the bibliography that it
  appends. In my tests, this worked rather better with Word than
  with Nisus Writer.

  This is lovely, but it doesn't go far enough. What if you
  encounter bugs in Papyrus's substitution algorithm, or in its
  scripting of the word processor? (I did.) Or what if you use a
  different word processor, like AppleWorks? To be sure, you can get
  around such problems manually; you could just export all your
  references in any needed formats, and then rearrange them within
  your project. But a far better solution would be for Papyrus
  itself to be scriptable; you might then, say, write an AppleScript
  or OneClick script that examines the number in the current
  selection, asks Papyrus for the citation for that reference in a
  given format, and pastes it into your document - essentially
  building your own automatic integration where Papyrus's fails.

  But Papyrus is not scriptable - ironic, considering the odium that
  the Papyrus documentation heaps upon AppleWorks for _its_ lack of
  scriptability. Once again, rather than opening itself to the
  user's commands, Papyrus wants all the power for itself, driving
  other programs through scripts that the user can't see, modify, or
  work around.


**Note-Taking** -- On one hand, Papyrus holds great promise as a
  note-taking program, because of the power of its queries. Every
  reference can have multiple keywords, and you can define
  relationships between references, and between keywords, and use
  them in queries. For example, you can define a reference
  relationship "contradicts," and then perform a query which yields
  not only all references with (let's say) the keyword
  "determinism," but also all references which contradict any
  reference in that found set. This remarkable capability to evoke
  the structure of argumentatively related positions reminds me of
  MacEuclid, whose like I thought I'd never see again.

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=02832>

  But alas, the same window which is so suitable for entry of brief
  reference fields is clumsy for comments longer than a sentence or
  two; nor is there any true hypertext, where a phrase becomes a
  link to another reference. Thus, I'd find Papyrus uncomfortable
  for note-taking, in contrast to a dedicated tool such as
  Palimpsest, or even an outliner. Papyrus needs a completely
  revised "note card" interface; additionally, it could take a cue
  from such programs as MORE, Helix, or In Control, by allowing a
  field to be an alias for opening a notes file with a different
  application. Papyrus seems once again, by its lack of such
  cooperation with other programs, to assert that it knows better
  than you do what you should want to do and how you should want to
  do it.

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=00752>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=02381>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=02443>


**Import** -- Papyrus can automatically import text bibliographies
  into reference fields; but this relies again upon Formats, and
  suffers from the same shortcomings. For instance, the input
  formula language (which is the same as the output formula
  language, a very odd design decision) lacks an "either/or" or
  "shortest match" construct. A genuine grep would have been really
  useful here; Nisus Writer's grep does a far better job of
  rearranging a text bibliography into canonical form than Papyrus
  could possibly do.


**Crossing The Ts** -- Papyrus is a splendid program. It is
  reliable, thoughtful, original, ingenious, straightforward. It is
  also easy to learn; the printed manuals rank with the best I have
  ever seen, and there is superb online and balloon help. It has
  many excellent touches I haven't had room to mention here.
  Doubtless my personal library contains books whose bibliographic
  style Papyrus would be hard pressed to emulate, but that's a minor
  issue; some last-minute hand tweaking is perfectly acceptable. If
  you maintain lots of references, generate citations in certain
  standard formats, and are using Microsoft Word, you should
  certainly give Papyrus a try.

  But despite offering such excellent features, Papyrus doesn't turn
  out to be the bibliography manager of my dreams. As I investigated
  Papyrus, I discovered that it lacks an important general quality
  for my work, that openness and programmability that I seek in any
  major workhorse. A bibliography system is basically just a
  database, after all; and I already have several database
  applications, plus other utilities, that are scriptable. So I can
  use these to form a bibliography management system that works the
  way I want. At present, it's a toss-up as to whether Papyrus gives
  me a good enough reason not to do that. On the other hand, when
  Papyrus sports a more sophisticated formatting language, a better
  note-taking interface, and scriptability, along with a less
  implicitly restrictive philosophy, I'll be hooked.

  Papyrus is $90, or $140 with printed manuals. A free demo version,
  limited to 200 references, is available for download. Papyrus
  requires System 7.0 or later, and is about an 11 MB installation
  (about 20 MB with full online help).

<http://www.rsd.com/Mac.html>


$$

 Non-profit, non-commercial publications may reprint articles if
 full credit is given. Others please contact us. We don't guarantee
 accuracy of articles. Caveat lector. Publication, product, and
 company names may be registered trademarks of their companies.

 This file is formatted as setext. For more information send email
 to <setext@tidbits.com>. A file will be returned shortly.

 For information: how to subscribe, where to find back issues,
 and more, email <info@tidbits.com>. TidBITS ISSN 1090-7017.
 Send comments and editorial submissions to: <editors@tidbits.com>
 Back issues available at: <http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/>
 And: <ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/issues/>
 Full text searching available at: <http://www.tidbits.com/search/>
 -------------------------------------------------------------------


