- Cheesy interface, looks like it was coloured in by a five year old. I suppose this could be a matter of taste (as in, you don't have any).
- Tiny user community! No amplification of knowledge through a non-existent social network - sucks compared to del.icio.us.
- Link spam! Doesn't get removed by site admins very quickly, if at all. (Connotea has an ongoing spam problem).
- Constant worry in the back of my mind that it is owned by Nature Publishing Group. What effect does this have, and to what extent is Connotea a walled garden? (Is Connotea controlled in the same way as Nature's From the Blogosphere, i.e. the bit of the blogosphere that Nature publishes?).
Grudging acknowledgment of the good points:
- Handling of doi's works well. Most times I try to click on a doi, it breaks, but Connotea seems to make doi's work as they should.
- Browser bookmarklet works well, interfaces with PubMed nicely.
- Interfaces with a range of bibiographic software (Endnote, Reference Manager and has a plain text export option for RefWorks).
Sigh, see what I go through for you in my self-appointed role to walk the walk? Next week, I will be mostly using CiteULike, but if you're a Conntea user and you have a different opinion, I'd be very interested to hear from you.
Update: Neil has the figures.