[Papyrus-L] Papyrus versus other Windows packages

[Jeremy S. Delaney]

As one of those who tried switching to Biblioscape let me add a few 
cautionary comments.
(1) Biblioscape is a snail! Loading takes forever and its search response time 
is awful.   I run a 12000 reference base in both Papyrus and biblioscape and 
frankly Papyrus is a cheetah compared to Biblioscape.
(2) As someone who works at home, in my office, in my lab and at remote 
national lab facilities, I have relied on the very reasonable Papyrus licensing 
policy of permitting up to 4 copies of the same database tobe operating on 
related machines.  Try loading a second copy of the supposedly more useful 
Biblioscape on a second machine and see how expensive it can get real fast.
(3) It is becoming very apparent to me that working around Papyrus' DOS-
imposed limitations is still far faster and therefore cost effective than trying to 
deal with any of the Windows based programs.

Jerry Delaney
> I stand corrected on Windows ME! 
> 
> Also I can offer another impartial plug for Biblioscape and Hugh
> Gunz's macro. However, there still are some remaining kinks to be
> worked out in converting Papyrus notecards to Biblioscape. If anyone
> else is interested in converting to Biblioscape, perhaps we can put
> our heads together to figure it out -- just email me for details.
> 
> Patricia Szobar
> PSzobar at aol.com
> 

Jeremy S. Delaney
Research Scientist, RU Microanalysis,
Rutgers University, DeptGeological Sciences
610 Taylor Rd, Piscataway, NJ08854-8066
PH: 732-445-3616: FX: 732-445-3374: jsd at rci.rutgers
____________________________________________________
Where is the knowledge that is lost in information?
Asked T.S.Elliot.
____________________________________________________