Bibus vs. Zotero

[Brian96]

I've always done references manually, but I'd like to automate a bit. I've found Bibus and Zotero, but I want people's feedback about which they prefer. I will be using Open Office, and both appear to integrate fairly well there. I will also be using APA-style references, and both appear to handle this well.

What advantages and disadvantages have folks found for each?

Also, is there a way to host the database for either one, say, on a flash drive, so that my references can move between home, office, and laptop relatively simply?

Thanks.

[earlycj5]

Haven't used Bibus, I've used Zotero, I just can't get into it for whatever reason. It seems like great software but I like my bibliography software to be just that and not my web browser I guess.

Check the Zotero forums, I'm not sure there's an easy way to integrate the dbase across computers yet. Well, there is, put Firefox on the USB drive and install Zotero on that.

[tweedledee]

Have used Bibus exclusively for over a year, not tried Zotero. Bibus it is easy to store the database wherever you want, and I use a single database with multiple computers. I like Bibus, it allows me the customization I need and handles imports/exports for my purposes (but I use pretty much PubMed, which is well standardized), and has been working well as a general-purpose literature manager, not just for citations in a particular document. There are some limitations compared to Word/Endnote, but those are most often due to limitations in OpenOffice rather than Bibus (and so probably also apply to Zotero), and there are features I like much better about Bibus than Endnote (ease of use once you get used to the interface, for example). With basic APA style, the few limitations in Bibus I've found with regard to referencing won't apply anyway, as that style is "simple" compared to some journal formats.

[Brian96]

Have used Bibus exclusively for over a year, not tried Zotero. Bibus it is easy to store the database wherever you want, and I use a single database with multiple computers. I like Bibus, it allows me the customization I need and handles imports/exports for my purposes (but I use pretty much PubMed, which is well standardized), and has been working well as a general-purpose literature manager, not just for citations in a particular document. There are some limitations compared to Word/Endnote, but those are most often due to limitations in OpenOffice rather than Bibus (and so probably also apply to Zotero), and there are features I like much better about Bibus than Endnote (ease of use once you get used to the interface, for example). With basic APA style, the few limitations in Bibus I've found with regard to referencing won't apply anyway, as that style is "simple" compared to some journal formats.

Could you please expand on the limitations of Bibus/Oo.org compared to Word/Endnote?

[Stunts]

Hi! I've been using Bibus too for quite a while now (like 2 years, nas two thesis and a paper using it) since the time I used OOo in M$ windows. It works great with Ubuntu and I would defenitly recommend it. I never tried zotero, so I can't really comapre them, but I found it to be quite better than Reference Manager 11, which is what i used before.
The database is kept (to the best of my limited knowledge) in a single SQlite (or mySQL, if you choose so), meaning you can easyly keep your databases up to date. At least in theory, since I have never tried it myself, excetp for making backups which worked quite well.
Hope this comment is helpfull.

[Brian96]

Thanks for the comments, folks.

I've been playing around with this today, and I haven't gotten very far with Bibus.

However, I am very pleased with Zotero so far. It seems to integrate very well with both Firefox and OpenOffice. With the notes, tags, and other features I think this may be more what I was looking for.

As far as sharing a database (or otherwise being able to have just one set of references), I found a potential solution. The Zotero tutorial suggests that by exporting your library as a "Zotero RDF" file, you can then import it to Zotero on another computer. I haven't tried it myself, but this seems to be a viable alternative for me. They also claim to be working on a more mature method for sharing references and notes.

[Mr Al]

I've tried both Bibus and Zotero, and I have to say that I much prefer Zotero. It is a little while since I used Bibus, but from what I can recall, I found it a frustrating experience. I remember having problems with formatting and inserting my references, and with defining the kinds of fields I wanted for my entries. I also remember spending a long time trying to (unsuccessfully) solve those problems. But like I say, that was a while ago, and my memory is a little fuzzy on the subject.

I am very enthusiastic about Zotero. I like the way it supports tagging, notes, and attaching PDFs, etc. I like the fact that it's quite flexible in terms of how it allows you to organise your references, and I like it that I can search my references, PDFs and web-pages. I like the way I can 'suck' web pages into it, and it handles citations in OpenOffice very well.

One thing that Zotero currently lacks is a way to create customised citation and bibliographic styles (though a solution is in the pipeline for that).

I suppose the one thing that I dislike about Zotero is that it is a Firefox add-on (earlycj5 makes the same point above). Personally, I would prefer my bibliography software to be a a desktop application in its own right, rather than being a Firefox add-on. That said, I can understand why the decision was made to make it as an add-on. Implementing Zotero in this way has had a lot of benefits - it has made it cross-platform, immediately web-aware, and has given Zotero access to a lot of Firefox users. In this sense, the decision to make Zotero as an add-on was undoubtedly a good one.

One final advantage of Zotero over Bibus - I could be quite wrong here, and I don't mean any disrespect to the Bibus developers, but I never got the impression that Bibus development was moving very quickly. As such, it didn't seem like a good long term bet. Zotero, on the other hand, is moving forward rapidly, with new features coming out all the time. A major new version is scheduled to come out at the same time as Firefox 3, and should take advantage of the new bells and whistles in the browser.

Phew, I really didn't mean to write that much!

[earlycj5]

I've tried both Bibus and Zotero, and I have to say that I much prefer Zotero. It is a little while since I used Bibus, but from what I can recall, I found it a frustrating experience. I remember having problems with formatting and inserting my references, and with defining the kinds of fields I wanted for my entries. I also remember spending a long time trying to (unsuccessfully) solve those problems. But like I say, that was a while ago, and my memory is a little fuzzy on the subject.

I am very enthusiastic about Zotero. I like the way it supports tagging, notes, and attaching PDFs, etc. I like the fact that it's quite flexible in terms of how it allows you to organise your references, and I like it that I can search my references, PDFs and web-pages. I like the way I can 'suck' web pages into it, and it handles citations in OpenOffice very well.

One thing that Zotero currently lacks is a way to create customised citation and bibliographic styles (though a solution is in the pipeline for that).

I suppose the one thing that I dislike about Zotero is that it is a Firefox add-on (earlycj5 makes the same point above). Personally, I would prefer my bibliography software to be a a desktop application in its own right, rather than being a Firefox add-on. That said, I can understand why the decision was made to make it as an add-on. Implementing Zotero in this way has had a lot of benefits - it has made it cross-platform, immediately web-aware, and has given Zotero access to a lot of Firefox users. In this sense, the decision to make Zotero as an add-on was undoubtedly a good one.

One final advantage of Zotero over Bibus - I could be quite wrong here, and I don't mean any disrespect to the Bibus developers, but I never got the impression that Bibus development was moving very quickly. As such, it didn't seem like a good long term bet. Zotero, on the other hand, is moving forward rapidly, with new features coming out all the time. A major new version is scheduled to come out at the same time as Firefox 3, and should take advantage of the new bells and whistles in the browser.

Phew, I really didn't mean to write that much!

I think I could like Zotero better if there was a Firefox extension for browsing the bibliography databases, websites, and the like but a standalone desktop application for regular use.

[jraab22]

I've tried both, although I didn't do well with Bibus. I had trouble getting the databases set up and after getting it working when I'd search pubmed for things I'd be missing things that were on the pubmed web site. Zotero I really like. I've been using it about 6 months and I really like how easy it is to capture citations. I also use it to organize papers I want to read but haven't gotten to yet. I keep an unfiled folder that as I'm browsing current tables of contents I'll save things that I don't have time read right away. My only problem was it would screw up cite while you write but numbering something twice. THis was on the last version and I haven't written anything on 1.0.3 yet. My workaround was to export my refs to jabref and use that with openoffice.

[balaoko]

I don't have experience with Bibus, but I recently used zotero. It sounds like a very good manager. Besides its easy installation, I like its following features:

1. easy to export library to endnote, which my colleagues use extensively
2 can customize the storage location so I can put the library at a specific place
3 easy to insert new references from firefox and can attach files.

I haven't attach files to the items yet, but I plan to. I hope that will rescue my current mess references in my directories.