If you are using one of these earlier versions, take a look at this FAQ and let “Thomson Reuters” know your thoughts and response. It is very likely your Endnote will see “malfunction” in a few weeks, due to the inability to import data newer than 2010.
Basically, if you are using software older than 4 years, you have a “wear and tear” problem, which makes your software stop working. That’s what they are saying.
Message Edited by myoshigi on 12-19-2009 03:26 PM
Okay, I’ve decided to nag at this one.
The “workaround” shown in the FAQ are worse than a terrible joke. One method is manually type in 2010 for each blank field, and another is to enter 2010 for all the blank fied using “Change/Move Field” function. Thank you. We are smart enough, if year is empty, we need to enter something. They also promise early 2010 for X2 patch, and first quater for X1 patch. Great, but how many times that kind of timeline has been strictly observed? All the users using X1 and X2 suffer from the empty year field for months? Users of 8-X need to type 2010 manually every time they import from Pubmed?
Obviously, they (developers) couldn’t predict year can be more than 2009. With such an incredibly poor ability of prediction, how we can anticipate the patch is delivered on time? If I’m the employer of the programmer who made the year parsing line, I’ll definitely fire that person.
Much more revealing fact is that, X3 now imports 2010 correctly. That means the year parsing line in the original C++ code has been modified since the release of X3. This means, they’ve developed correct lines to parse year data. How come they need “months” to change the lines in the codes for older versions? Recompiling job should take place in a matter of single day, at least in a week??
“Even” Microsoft is providing free security updates for XP, which was released in 2001, and MS say they will provide the free update until 2013 (12 years of support). Endnote X is just ~4 years old, and the software becomes lameduck in a few weeks, and the develper is unwilling to provide patch on time??
Thomson Reuters doesn’t seem like understanding “what is critical function and what is not in Endnote”, and “what makes software business profitable”. It’s a timely, and faithful support. Well, it’s an open invitation for long-time users to switch to Zotero, Biblioscape, Mendeley, and others.
I think I said enough, so I stop here. Let me know if there are illogical or rubbish stuff.
Dear Endnote team @ Thomson Reuters:
I have finished my preliminary tests using Endnote 9, X, X1, and X2 for Windows regarding 2010 import problem. My tests indicate, not only filter import, but also connection file import method , failed to import 2010 correctly. My conclusion is this is not a problem with filter or connection files. It is the problem with parsing algorithm in Endnote itself prior to X2.
I want you to recognize this is a huge problem you cannot disregard. As of today, Pubmed has more than 13,000 references with 2010 date tag [DP]. It is a matter of time, millions of Endnote users in the world will find they can’t import 2010 correctly. Your customer and technical support phone/e-mail will be flooded with this problem, within a matter of weeks. (Already maybe?)
Currently, I supervise undergraduate and graduate students and some librarians, regarding what bibliography software to be used and employed at work, classes, or at labs. Endnote has been my top recommendation. After the recommendation, many students test Endnote site licenses at libraries, take “How to use Endnote” classes at our library, and continue testing at labs until they choose which one they like to use in the future. Most of these machines, including Win and Mac, still runs versions prior to X2. With this 2010 problem, which make all the trial users to type 2010 manually, I am 100% sure they will not choose Endnote. I also do not recommend them to purchase X3, because there is a risk the support is terminated within less than 5 years.
In my humble opinion, Endnote is software that thrives at academia. If students (future customers of your software) choose not to use Endnote for their academic work, I predict, with much confidence, Endnote market share will decline.
I urge you to release emergency patch for all the X1, X2 users , and seriously re-evaluate the decision you have made to dump all the version 8-X users. I would temporarily halt X4 development if I run this team, and my resource is limited, until this problem is surely fixed. I don’t think it is too late to turn your decisions over. However, time is running out. Again, this could be a significant problem that would damage profitability from Endnote in the future. I urge you quick exective decision.
Thank you for listening to user forum opinions.
Sincerely yours,
myoshigi, just a user
Message Edited by myoshigi on 12-20-2009 03:27 PM
Endnote team @ Thomson Reuters:
Now, I found the FAQ of the 2010 problem is among the top of the “Hot Issues” in the support page.
And it clearly says:
EndNote X through 8 are no longer supported, and will require an upgrade to the current version to correct the issue.
Your team needs to realize, this is something like car shopping. Some people buy and sell a brand new car every other year, to look for a new and modern look, “slightly improved” functions, and continuous warranty support. Some people buy a car and keep it forever until the car “stops” running. I’m the former for Endnote, and the latter for car shopping.
My adjacent labs, throughout the building, still use version X, A LOT. Why they are using older versions? Obviously they can afford it. But they don’t upgrade, because they don’t find legitimate reasons to upgrade! The car is still running fine. What they need from Endnote is basically IMPORT function and bibliography formatting function (+several key output styles), and THAT’S IT! As long as these functions are working (i.e. they can drive the car), they don’t mind using old version (i.e. driving old looking cars). In a sense, Endnote has already been commoditized for them.
Here’s the change. Post-docs and students in their labs find out Endnote import function doesn’t correctly import papers published in 2010. They look for reasons and solutions, and find out the FAQ (or come to me for suggestions). The engine of their Endnote is pretty much “stop and go”, and very frustrating to drive. Manufacture (Thomson Reuters) says, “Your car is out of warranty, and no parts can fix the problem” so you need to buy a brand new car from them. It costs $100 for “every” license they own.
Here’s my suggestions. “Oh, if you are using Endnote just for creating 50-100 references from Pubmed, and format bibliography for the current manuscript, there is an excellent alternative like Zotero, and it is free.” “Besides, the manufacture made the Endnote engine such that it stops working when the year hits 2010. It’s been cleary writtin in the Help manual, and they knew that from the time they made it.” Their response is “WHAT?!?”
And I will also say, “If Microsoft stops supporting XP in 2013, the OS becomes unsafe (i.e. roads are unsafe to drive). At that point, you would want to upgrade your Endnote that runs on the Win 7 (i.e. renovated, safer, and slightly better roads), but you can probably keep using Zotero, because it’ll get more user base, and timely improvements and bug fixes.”
You know what? They’ll find out they don’t need to upgrade Endnote now and 2013 as well. They don’t find legitimate reasons to do that. If it is normal wear and tear issues (e.g. running on unsafe OS), they would have upgradeded. But the Endnote engine simply stopped working after 4 years, and the manufacture designed the engine that way. What a poor engineering. It’s time to test a car from “different” manufacturer.
This is how you lose 50 or more licensees with this “fixable”, but “regrettable” issue. Your team has been marketting this software for two decades (?) world wide. It is truely amazing you don’t realize this “simple” prediction.
Message Edited by myoshigi on 12-21-2009 08:28 AM
Hi All,
I had a chance to talk with a staff at Endnote team about this issue. Some of the conversation, I can’t disclose because of the nature of the work, but one thing I can say, I had a good impression about the effort they are putting together now, trying to address this 2010 problem.
Additionally, I need to corret my previous post about the part I accused, saying “Developers knew this problem for years, and purposely designed Endnote to stop working in 2010, because Help files of older version say 200# format is imported.”
That was truely my speculation, and it was untrue. Even developers discovered this defect very recently, and the explanation of the Help file was simply carry over from old old versions. So, I’d like to take back my “emotional” back-lash, and give them some grace period to fix this problem. Nevertheless, this problem is a big one, and Endnote team definitely realizes the impact. That’s what I found from the direct conversation.
We are in holiday season now, and we can’t expect prompt responses from Thomson Reuters. But let’s hope they come up the best solutions for users at earliest point of time.
Cheers, and happy holidays for all.
myoshigi, just a user
Okay, Endnote team has updated solutions for X2 users here.
Looks like 2009 year end sale is extend to encourage <X users for upgrade?
If I’m a <X user, I’ll immediately take advantage of this. $40 discound sounds like a steal.
Up to you.
I will pass this information to my colleagues around here using version X (Win and Mac), to see if they are willing to take this “opportunity”.
Before that, I’ll probably call customer support to make sure the upgrade is really $60.
When I distributed “2010 problem” around my lab, some folks said “darn it, let’s try zotero”, but most of the folks wanted to stay with Endnote. What they were worried about was the migration of the existing libraries (some of them are huge), and “new learning curve”.
I’m sure Endnote team is looking at this thread and gave me three Kudos for my post on 12/22, right? So, hopefully we get some words from them about the $60 deal sometime soon?
Message Edited by myoshigi on 01-06-2010 11:27 PM
HI…
well i am using endnote x3.0.1. and i am facing problems gaining full text from sciencedirect.for example i searched a term and it yields 230 results so i wanted to gain full text of all the ref but endnote could manage to give me only 68 files of 230.although almost all the pdf are available on sciencedirect but it seems that endnote can retrieve pdf from science direct.then i tried endnote x2 but the result was similar!. i have checked all the boxes in fulltext preferences although i dont have any open url put into the box and neither i put authentication link in the full text preferences.but i think it don’t matter for science direct because our university has subscription of sciencedirect and when we log on to science direct there is no need to enter user name and password for us.
so where is the problem?
please help me
HI…
well i am using endnote x3.0.1. and i am facing problems gaining full text from sciencedirect.for example i searched a term and it yields 230 results so i wanted to gain full text of all the ref but endnote could manage to give me only 68 files of 230.although almost all the pdf are available on sciencedirect but it seems that endnote can retrieve pdf from science direct.then i tried endnote x2 but the result was similar!. i have checked all the boxes in fulltext preferences although i dont have any open url put into the box and neither i put authentication link in the full text preferences.but i think it don’t matter for science direct because our university has subscription of sciencedirect and when we log on to science direct there is no need to enter user name and password for us.
so where is the problem? please help me
Endnote X1 with the latest patch correctly imports 2010 references for me.