The major advantages to Bookends over Endnote are (1) it does not crash MS Word, (2) frequent updates are made to the code and (3) the program's author responds in a timely manner to questions and even seeks suggested improvements.

However, one IMPORTANT function that is missing is the ability to compound several literature references under a single bibliography number. This is standard for the overwhelming majority of peer-reviewed journals in the physical sciences and is an absolute necessity when preparing funding proposals and other documents that must conform to a maximum number of pages. It can save a lot of space in a document.

I have asked the program author if he has any intention of including this function in future program versions. His response leads me to believe that he unfortunately does not appreciate the importance of this function.

A more minor fault is the lack of an appropriate import filter for records from the "SciFinder" database, which is essential for modern chemists.

The program author offers export formats for the major chemistry journals but on the other hand the program does not support the usual conventions that are needed for that field.

In its current state, I very much enjoy using Bookends for light-weight documents, but for serious stuff, EndNote is still the way to go.

Until this limitation has been rectified, I will not be buying any upgrades to V 9.0 etc.