Sente vs. Papers: What is the best PDF management system? (part 2)

Sente vs Papers (part 2)This article is the second part of the big showdown between Sente and Papers. With a price tag of around $100 for the complete package (Mac and iPad app) and a similar (but not identical!) set of features, the decision of what system is the best fit for your PDF management needs is not easy. And it is more than money that is at stake, as you will spend a considerable amount of time building your library once you have taken the plunge.

The first part of this showdown between Sente and Papers has discussed the differences in their respective ecosystems, how references are organized, and what annotation features are offered. If you haven’t done so, it is probably a good idea to read the first part now, as these are the biggest differences between Sente and Papers. I will wait until you are back…

App Store links: Sente ($20), Papers ($15). Mac / Windows links: Sente ($90) and Papers ($80).

Okay, now that you are in the know about the major differences between both ecosystems, what else do you need to know? Two other areas in which there are noticeable differences between Sente and Papers have to do with the design philosophy of both apps. Papers uses a very Mac-like, playful approach, and it shows in the user interface and how easy it is to add citations to your write-ups (via Magic Manuscript). Sente, on the other hand, offers solid and sometime more advanced features, but the packaging is not as welcoming as it is with Papers.

 

User Interface

Let face it: your research is difficult enough, so why making things harder with a confusing interface? If you are a fan of the polished, candy-like look-and-feel of iconic Mac apps (yeah, okay, I’ll say it: iTunes), then Papers is your friend.

Its beautiful and simple design has earned Papers the title of being the "iTunes for PDFs"

Its beautiful and simple design has earned Papers the title of being the “iTunes for PDFs”. The great strengths of Papers is its flat learning curve and its convincing Magic Manuscript workflow through which you can cite papers without touching the mouse.

Papers is simply much “easier to get” for two reasons: First, its organization routine resembles more what you are used to from when you started out in grad school. Whenever this was, I bet it probably involved sorting papers into digital or real folders, and Papers lets you simple re-create this folder structure. Second, the user interface of Papers is playful and clean.

Sente, on the other hand, has a steeper learning curve and its user interface is more cluttered – both on the Mac and the iPad. It got a lot better on the Mac in the version 6.5 release, but don’t expect that you will master it right from the start. However, if you are willing to invest the time, you will be rewarded with Sente’s greater functionality in terms of organizing and annotating papers.

Sente's user interface is a little cluttered, but full with useful information once you got used to it. One of the biggest strengths of Sente is its focus on tagging as a way to organize your library. However, this is also one of the main reasons why Sente has a steeper learning curve than other apps..

Sente’s user interface is a little cluttered, but full with useful information once you got used to it. One of the biggest strengths of Sente is its focus on tagging as a way to organize your library. However, this is also one of the main reasons why Sente has a steeper learning curve than other apps.

 

Citing references

Sente and Papers follow different approaches of how references are cited in-text. Both work fine across a broad range of word processors, so it comes down to your personal preference which one is the best match for you.

Papers Magic Manuscript

Papers’ Magic Manuscript allows you to insert references into your writing projects without using your mouse. You can search for the paper you want to cite by its author, name, or keyword.

Papers came up with a neat, graphical way of citing references via “Magic Manuscript”. The general idea behind Magic Manuscript is that you open up a dialogue via a keystroke, locate the paper you want to cite, and insert the paper into your document. The great thing about Papers’ Magic Manuscript is that it finds the paper you have in mind even if you can hardly remember it: title, author, no idea? All you know is that it was about “anti-consumption” and published in the “CMC” journal? Bang – Papers found it!

Sente comes with much less bells and whistles. Once you have located the papers you want to cite in Sente’s database, you can add a citation key from within Sente. A better way to cite is, however, to insert the citation key manually into the document. Manually adding citation keys will speed up adding citations and minimize interruptions in your writing flow, but only for papers you know well and don’t have to look up first. Sente does a pretty good job in recognizing what paper you are trying to cite (e.g., using the first author and year of publication as an ad-hoc citation key works most of the time), and you can even define your own citation keys (e.g., “S11″ instead of “Scholz 2011″) . The drawback is obviously that with Sente you are more on your own to find the papers you want to cite.

It might depend on your writing style and your discipline what approach will suit you best. If you cite a broad range of papers that are not always crucial to your argument, Papers might be better at locating papers that slipped your mind. On the other hand, if you are very sparse with citations and only reference the most crucial papers, chances are that these papers are on top of your mind already. In that case, Sente’s way of citing would be less intrusive for you.

Other features, such as how references are added to your library and how much you have to pay for the apps, are pretty similar. So if you are in a hurry, you can probably skim through the next three sections until you hit the conclusion that comes back to the point of which ecosystem is the best match for your individual PDF management needs.

 

Adding references to your library

The best way to add references to your library is over the Mac. Both Sente and Papers perform well at this task, and the differences are really minor. Both let you access the web from within the app for searching and adding papers to your personal library.

I like Sente’s Target Browsing mode, which makes adding books and other non-journal references a little easier. On the other hand, Sente lacks a decent drag-and-drop mechanism to add PDFs that you already have on your computer: While Sente expects you to drop a file into the library view of the main window, Papers is okay with just dropping the file on its icon in the dock.

But essentially, there is little difference between both ecosystems when it comes to adding references to your library.

 

Check out academiPad's facebook page today
Do you like academiPad? Check out our facebook page to show your love and to participate in our community.

Price

Sente and Papers are offered at a very similar price point; so similar that you can’t really speak of a difference here. Sure, the full Sente ecosystem (Mac $90, iPad $20) costs $16 more than the Papers ecosystem (Mac $79, iPad/iPhone $15), but this is negligible given that PDF management is the daily bread for academics.

Both systems come with different pricing options for students, which makes your life a little less expensive if you are one. (Note: Sente’s undergraduate student version is limited to 250 references.)

 

Other Stuff

If you are still on the fence between Papers and Sente, maybe Papers can win you over with its social networking function called “Livfe”. It is similar to what Mendeley offers, with the obvious caveat that Papers is not free and has therefore a smaller user base. When I looked up my field, I didn’t find too much going on in Livfe, and so I lost interest. However, your field might be different, and if the social networking approach to discovering papers is something you believe in, then Papers might be the right choice for you.

Another feature that I haven’t talked about yet are Supplements. Papers lets you add extra files to references in an easy way (just drag the file into the Supplements plane in the Inspector). I like the way how Papers implemented this feature, but want to point out that you can also add any file to a reference in the Sente library. So beyond the way of implementation, there is little difference between Papers and Sente in terms of supplementing files.

 

Sente vs Papers: Who is your winner?

As this review shows, it really comes down to your own needs and preferences of whether Papers or Sente is the better PDF management system. Both are decent ecosystems with room for improvements, and I am sure that especially the annotation workflows will be further improved along the way.

Picking which ecosystem is the best for you is a long-term decision, not only because of the money involved, but much more because of the time you will spend building up your library. After all, your reading history is one of your greatest assets as an academic.

To make the right decision, it is helpful to think about the core questions outlined in part 1 of this article What will your ecosystem look like? What demands do you have for syncing devices? What is your style of organizing and annotating papers?

If you need more details, you can read the individual reviews of the Mac and iPad apps here:

 

What I am using

I personally was on the fence for a long time which ecosystem I should adopt as my primary PDF management system. Papers is really good at being first at things: it brought highlighting to the iPad early on, and it was quick to support the Retina Display of the new iPad. Also, I am applauding the developers of Papers to venture into the Windows world; this move makes a lot of business sense!

However, I am drawn to Sente to manage and read my PDFs, because I value syncing over the cloud and Sente’s more advanced annotation functions (i.e., quotes and overview plane for comments, quotes, and notes). Also, I am a strong believer that tagging is a great way to organize information, and since Sente is built around tagging, it seems to be a better fit for me. I often wish it was easier to use, but hopefully the developer will sort out all remaining quirks and clean up the interface over time.

But that is just me, and there are plenty of reasons for why Papers might be a better fit for you: Windows support and ease of use are only two of them.

As a last word, I suggest that the functions and feel of the Mac apps should drive your decision. You will probably do most PDF management tasks on the Mac, and use the iPad companion app mainly for reading and annotating. The Mac apps have free trial versions, so be sure to test both first hand.

This is the moment of truth… App Store links: Sente ($20), Papers ($15). Mac / Windows links: Sente ($90) and Papers ($80).

Has this article been useful in making up your mind? If the answer is yes, please leave your thoughts in the comment section below! For example: What ecosystem are you going for, and why?

Disclaimer: All images by academiPad, except Magic Manuscript image (by mekentosj). Please consider sharing this article if you found it useful.

academiPad RSS feedDid you enjoy this article? Please join academiPad's RSS feed to get free updates with even more tips on research, teaching and learning! Here are six reasons why.


Comments

  1. Ranjeev says:

    This is a great review on PDF. Very useful for those in the lookout for “academia apps”. Its a good thing you took the trouble to present this as I had a hard time finding any over the internet.

    Well done. Thoroughly enjoyed the whole series of Papers & Sente.

  2. Me gustó mucho tu artículo. Voy a hacer las pruebas en ambos programas para decidirme por alguno, pero de entrada me llama más Sente. Pondré tu link en mi blog.

  3. Christoph says:

    Great post, thanks very much. Would love to see some more advice / tips around writing academically on the iPad. Is there a way of working with a reference manager on Pages on the iPad for instance?

    • Jo says:

      Thanks, Christoph!
      Neither Papers nor Sente offer a full cite-as-you-write support in their iPad apps. The best way to do this, I would think, is to just insert the citation keys into the document you are writing on the iPad. This is easiest with Sente. Please check out the Sente for Mac post for that.

  4. Jake says:

    This article is a good public service.

  5. Kat says:

    Hi Jo!

    Have you taken a look at Papers2 lately? I just downloaded the free trial for Mac, and it looks like you can now view all notes and highlighted text for a pdf file in one column. This was one of the major tasks I needed and has made my decision much easier. Thanks so much for putting all that effort into crafting such detailed reviews and comparisons! Your blog is absolutely amazing and a *huge* help as I purchase a new ipad and get ready to return to school.

    • Jo says:

      Hi Kat,

      You are right, Papers added an overview plane for its Mac app in its last update. It is a step into the right direction, though it would be nice if they added color codings to the overview. I also hope that this feature will make it over to their iPad app soon.

      Thanks for pointing this out – I updated the first part of this article accordingly. Plus, I am glad you find academiPad helpful. Thanks for telling :-)

  6. martina says:

    Hi Jo,
    Sente does not seem to support in-text search. Is this possible with Papers? I mean: what if in my bunch of PDFs I cannot find “that one” but I remember it was somehow about “X”? I am not talking of quoting it in a manuscript as a ref, just finding it back again tocheck read and so on. Or: any for it besides these two? thanks a lot!

    • Jo says:

      Hey Martina,
      You are right, Sente does not have in-text search yet. I was told they want to add this some time. Papers has in-text search.

  7. BB says:

    Jo:
    This is a great review. Can you answer a few more questions?
    1. i have heard that papers is more geared to the natural sciences, and lacks the ability to pull papers from some major sites in the humanities, and lacks some of the important humanities citation styles. Any thoughts?
    2. Where does each program store comments&annotations? Are they done in such a way that they can be viewed in other programs? I am thinking of both back-up and long-term accessibility–I don’t want to get tied into a proprietary format which may one day disappear.

    thanks!

    • Jo says:

      Hey BB:
      I am in marketing, but I am pulling lots of articles from sociology, anthropology, environmental history. I am not using Papers as my main database any longer, but I had only few problems getting the metadata for papers from these areas. JSTOR, googlescholar and so on work fine with papers.
      The annotations and comments are stored in their own database. You won’t be able to read any of these comments in standard pdf viewers. Thats the price you have to pay for having a database, unfortunately. I agree that there is the danger of your app being discontinued, but even if this may happen down the road, you will be still able to access your annotations on the discontinued app. Thats the benefit of the stuff being stored on your hard drive, and not just being a web service.
      Hope that helps…
      Jo

  8. Dellu says:

    Great article. I was considering to buy Sente. I found the annotation system Sente build quite robust and helpful, specially in integration with Devonthink, things seem so promising. But, this last point you raise, the possibility of locking down my annotations into a database is quite disconcerting. That was exactly the reason led me abandon Mendeley a few years ago. I have to do the same with the Sente, unfortunately. I love the app, but I hate that my annotations will be locked.

  9. Gibson says:

    . I have never had it crash, though I have had to back mlesyf out of apps that seemed to have no logical next step. This was the result either of my ignorance or the fact that there is less of a standard user interface from app to app than there is in classical GUIs such as OS X and Windows. For the laptop lugging road-warrior, it should be noted, this is not going to be a full replacement. I now take my laptop and my iPad when I go into the college. But much of the time there, I use my iPad because it is so light, convenient and useable. I use it to teach my classes and often reference traditional texts from the iPad instead of lugging them along to class. I develop my own web pages on my 27 desktop which is the right environment for such development; I wouldn’t expect to do that on an iPad. In education (and evidently in medicine), it is proving to be a real boon. The enterprise situations where portable information access and transmission are critical will find this a compelling solution. The heavy Photoshop user or music track editor will still need a conventional computer, either laptop or desktop. I purchased the 64GB version, which may be more storage than I need. But since it will drive my 50 screen downstairs I figured I would begin to load lots of pictures and favored music, so it may prove a wise choice in the long run. It can swallow up entire evenings with the music-augmented slide shows it can do. In fact, you may begin to wonder if you need cable TV. Conventional content providers should be worried about the iPad since it provides yet another way for the user to determine viewing experience. But if you are still drawn to cable, it makes a fine remote control. Before

  10. Nabil says:

    Hi Jo!

    Thank you very much for the awesome article series! I read all articles with great interest. I’ve bought Sente a few months ago and I must confess I’m really disappointed. I have three problems:
    1) In my PhD., I do cite some German papers. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to tell Sente to make the citation case-sensitive. I have to do it for each reference via Preferences… Is there a better way to do this in Papers?

    2) I do write using Scrivener. I compiled the file into docx. Then, I did scan the docx file in Sente. However, when I tried opening the scanned file in Pages, I was told that the document is corrupt.
    I tried a different way: Save the docx as a Pages document, then scan the Pages document. However, not all references were recognized. The bibliography was not complete…

    3) Sente is relatively slow; the UI is horrible; until now, there is no search functionality in PDFs…

    • Tommaso Gnoli says:

      Dear Nabil, in my opinion you would compile Scrivener file in RTF, than work with Nisus. Bookends is absolutely more stable, very easy to setting capitalization etc. than Sente and Papers. With Bookend on Taps you have a complete companion allowing annotation on iPad. Annotations on Mac are useless in Mac, because Bookends on Mac reads and remembers annotations made with Preview, Adobe Acrobat, Skim etc. …

  11. John Laudun says:

    A great write-up. I was pretty convinced to go with Sente, if only for its more robust annotation workflow — I have been looking for an app that respects the difference between quotes and notes for quite some time! — but I assumed that sync was handled through DropBox. It’s not. Or not any longer. Worse, if you want to have a library with anything over 100 items in it, then you have to pay for that privilege as well: $30 for academic users, $50 for everyone else. Ouch!

Join the Discussion

*

Have you Subscribed via RSS yet? Don't miss a post!