[Papyrus-L] Why Windows?

[Dr Andrew Wilson]

Some comments on the need for a Windows version, and possible alternative
packages:

WINDOWS:

For those who missed the repeated discussions of this question over the
several years, the major flaws of Papyrus for DOS which we needed addressed
in a Windows version are:

1. Lack of full extended Latin alphabet support, and non-Latin alphabets.
ASCII codepage workarounds do not do the full job - I simply can't enter
properly the Eastern European words or names which include the hacek or
L-with-a-line-through-it symbols; nor can I enter Classical or modern Greek
in titles etc.

2. Poor integration of text formatting with Windows programs - DOS required
Papyrus to use formatting codes {i...} etc to represent italics, underline,
superscript etc., and when you cite a formatted reference to paste into a
Windows application, or exchange parts of reference data between Papyrus and
other programs using F3, these codes are not converted to proper text
formatting - you have to do this manually. This is a problem if many of your
references include foreign or Latin words in the title or other fields which
are distinguished by formatting.

3. Limited compatibility with recent Windows versions. Papyrus does not have
proper access to the clipboard of NT-based Windows versions. Last week I had
to upgrade to Windows 2000 for compatibility with new releases of the GIS
software I use, and this had rendered Papyrus barely usable. I can no longer
reliably cite to Windows applications, despite the supposed NT clipboard
workaround file (it only seems to pick up F3 copies, not formatted
citations). The manic cursor problem means I am constantly having to switch
into full-screen mode, which makes switching between Papyrus and Windows
applications very slow.

4. Poor handling of scrollable lists. Browsing through several hundred
results of a search is a real pain in a DOS box limited to 80 b 24
characters. It's frustrating not to be able to use the space of a 19-inch
screen under Windows to do this.

These are limitations imposed on Papyrus by the DOS environment. In
addition, there are other much-needed features that Papyrus 7 lacks:

5. Global search and replace of text in a particular field (the main library
collections I use have recently been moved into a different library; I need
to update the library name in the location field so my teaching
bibliographies are current).

6. Better de-duplication facilities to get rid of duplicates not detected on
import (usually through differences in title capitalisaton in the source
files).

7. Integrated WWW access.

Etc. etc.

If you don't need any of these features, stick with the DOS version - but ON
NO ACCOUNT UPGRADE TO A VERSION OF WINDOWS LATER THAN WINDOWS 98. This will
probably limit your use of Papyrus to another 3 years or so - your next
computer will have an NT-based version of Windows or later and you'll have
difficulties with the clipboard etc.

ALTERNATIVES:

I'm now evaluating alternatives and so far for me the front runner is
looking like Reference Manager. I need to define my own impot formanrs and
that rules out some packages. Endnote won't handle more than 32,000
references or 32 MB in the same database, and I have nearly 72,0000
references. ProCite kept falling over when I tried to import my database -
it couldn't handle the size. Reference Manager seems to have a more flexible
means of defining and editing import formats, so I'm trying with that at the
moment but I'm still some way off a perfect import - the RIS OUT format
needs editing to ensure all my Papyrus fields are carried over.

This exercise is bringing home to me how advanced the programming code of
Papyrus is - none of the other packages has anything like Papyrus'
artificial intelligence, flexibility or user interface. I am going to miss
those things, but I need my database to work properly under current releases
the Windows operating system.

Does anybody know of a Windows package that does notecards as well as
bibliography/reference management ?
RSD:

It's a tribute to the quality of RSD's support and the user loyalty that
they have created that the predominant reaction on this list has been sorrow
and sympathy rather than the anger and feelings of being badly let down
which I have to admit was my initial reaction to the bad news. I have used
Papyrus since 1993 and bought it originally partly because the hope of a
Windows released was held out in RSD's support statements (on email lists at
that date; later on the WWW). During the 8 years I have used the program
there has not been a single point version upgrade for the DOS program, and I
have delayed a move to alternatives because all statements on the issue
emanating from RSD affirmed their commitment to producing a Windows version.

Dave has not actually said that the halting of the Windows project is a
direct result of the recent court case, although his carefully-worded
message possibly implies it. The legal costs may have sounded the death
knell, but I'd be surprised if RSD's financial state has been unaffected
over the last two or three years by the business mistake of developing for
Mac before Windows which excluded them from huge sectors of the market.

It's a very sad way for it all to end. I wish RSD well, and hope somebody
can buy or resurrect the code so it can be developed into a Windows version.
If that happens, I'll return to the fold, but I can't afford money up front,
and I need to move to an alternative now. Any information on others'
experiences moving large databases (>50,000 records) to other packages would
be very welcome.

--

Dr Andrew Wilson
University Lecturer in Roman Archaeology
Institute of Archaeology
36 Beaumont St
Oxford


  -----Original Message-----
  From: papyrus-l-admin at rsd.com [mailto:papyrus-l-admin at rsd.com]On Behalf Of
Avishai Antonovsky
  Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 10:37 PM
  To: papyrus-l at rsd.com
  Subject: [Papyrus-L] Why Windows?


  I've been using Papyrus since 1992. Since it's been able to work with the
Windows clipboard, I haven't really felt that I need a full Windows version
(except for being able to enter right-to-left text, for several Hebrew
references I have). Beside giving up being able to enter (and sort, and
search etc.) data that are right-to-left, which is not something the great
majority of the Papyrus community needs, can someone outline the major
advantages of a full Windows version (assuming one uses Word 97 or 2000)?
  Best,
  Avishai Antonovsky

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Avishai Antonovsky, Associate and Managing Editor
  Megamot ("Trends") -- Behavioral Sciences Journal
  Henrietta Szold National Institute for Research in the Behavioral Sciences
  9 Columbia St.
  96583 Jerusalem
  Israel
  Phone: 972-2-6494460/1
  Fax: 972-2-6437698
  email: msavish at mscc.huji.ac.il

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/papyrus-l/attachments/20011013/84d643d7/attachment.htm