There are plenty of reference management tools. Papers, RefWorks, Endnote, JabRef, Zotero, colwiz, readcube, and more. Here's a comparison table at wikipedia (probably not super up-to-date but worth taking a look): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_managem...
Why the use of the past tense? Mendeley still has all those features and more. :) Also, the open API we provide allows for building third-party applications like Android apps and such. But I digress. :)
The past tense is presumably because the GP doesn't want to use a tool produced by Elsevier, so as far as they are concerned the tool no longer exists.
Yup. I was already very hesitant to invest a bunch of time in a tool that could be pulled out from underneath me by a for-profit company, and in fact I never integrated it into my work. With Elsevier owning it, I wouldn't consider risking it.
The keys to the castle have been turned over to the enemy. I'm going to have to migrate eventually, so might as well start sooner rather than later. This is an incredibly sad event for me. But, like I said, I should have known better. Closed-source software can be taken away and turned toward evil purposes and there's nothing the users can do about it.
I'd be rich if I had a penny for each time such promises were publicly made when acquiring a company and broken within less than 12 months.
Even right here on HN there have been many posts about such situations some time after acquisitions; and Elsvier reasonably does have practical motivation to interfere here and there.
Such arms-length separations are often published in mergers&acquisitions PR and practically never happen in practice, they all get abused - should we really believe that Elsevier is so exceptionally more etchical than most other companies?
They have that "remote" in their hands. They have promised not to use it. Will they?
We're here and ready to not be destroyed. From the looks of it at the office, it's work as usual. By that I mean, building a great tool and resource for researchers. :)
Everything I've read from folks at Mendeley misses the point of the disgust. Most people are not concerned about Mendeley going away, or about development stopping, or about new features not being added. Of course you're continuing to build the tool, at least the for the foreseeable future. Of course Mendeley will continue to be have a free version, etc. Of course Mendeley will continue to add features.
But none of that is because Elsevier has suddenly decided to support open access. It's because buying and developing Mendeley is an affordable way for Elsevier to launder its godawful reputation. All the smiling emoticons in the world don't change that.
Maye this person that left knew something like this would happen. The timing is irrelevant, what is relevant is that the ones thst stay are linked to a publisher that has no morals, no ethics.
Integration of Mendeley with Elsevier's Scopus and ScienceDirect is very much on the roadmap. The desktop app is going to continue to see more attention. Some great features coming to our next release. We've totally rewritten the iOS app and will be working on an official Android client soon too. Support for win/linux/mac is to continue too. :)
