Head to head
Crossref vs Apple Contacts
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Resolve DOIs, search ~155M scholarly works, and fetch references via the Crossref REST API.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Search and read Apple Contacts — resolves numbers and emails to names, writes off by default
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. Both score close on the safety scan (92 and 92 out of 100). Crossref is hosted and callable through the gateway; Apple Contacts runs on your own machine. Apple Contacts has noticeably more public adoption.
| Crossref | Apple Contacts | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A92/100 | A92/100 |
| Adoption | New | Growing |
| GitHub stars | 3 | 3 |
| Downloads / week | – | 713 |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Your machine (local) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | No |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | NOASSERTION | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-13 | 2026-09-19 |
| Category | Web search | Web search |