I'm the developer and designer of Scrivener. I'm really grateful for all user suggestions as they have made Scrivener better and better, and enjoy reading users' ideas. But for the sake of keeping these forums as constructive and manageable as possible, I'd be really grateful if users could follow the basic forum rules laid out below when posting their suggestions.
Note: For users in a rush, all the rules can be expressed concisely as follows:
The First Rule of Wish List... wrote:1. Use the forum's "Search" feature before posting.
2. Be polite - I'm the developer, I read all requests, and I take things personally!
3. Take "no" for an answer - Scrivener isn't intended to do everything, so please don't be overly insistent.
4. Features are not implemented on a voting system; features are only added if I feel they a) fit in with my over-all vision for Scrivener and b) are practical. (Thus, for instance, please never respond to existing suggestions with "+1".)
5. All features of the Mac version are planned for inclusion in the Windows version. We can't provide any specific dates, but anything you see in the Mac version will be coming to the Windows version if it's not there already. Therefore please do not post asking for features from the Mac to be made available for Windows.
For those with a little more time, here's the less terse version:
Scrivener is a program in active development, so all suggestions are welcomed. However, before posting, please do bear in mind that Scrivener cannot be all things to all people, so, whilst I will consider every suggestion, no matter how small, you may just receive a reply saying why it won't happen. Please don't let that put you off making other suggestions though, and don't be offended if I don't think your idea is appropriate for Scrivener. Given that I personally read all suggestions and do my best to answer as many as I can, please make sure you follow these rules:
1) Before posting, use the forum's "Search" feature. Your suggestion may have been made before. It might already have been implemented for the next version, or it might already be in the current version but hidden away somewhere. Or, there might be a good explanation already available on the forum as to why it isn't planned. A quick search may provide the answer without any need for posting (if it doesn't, of course, post!). Reducing multiple posts asking for the same thing saves development time.
2) Please be polite; or, sugar your pill. I am not a faceless corporation (and nor am I charging like one), but just an individual attempting to create the best writers' software that I can with the time and resources available. And that means that sometimes I take things personally. Posts that imply that Scrivener will be no good to anybody unless it implements your suggestions are likely to get a more frosty reception that those that ask politely and provide a good, considered and standalone reason for the request. By the same token, please be considerate enough to explain your suggestion properly, rather than just, "Please make such-and-such better."
3) Take "no" for an answer graciously. Sure, sometimes I say no and then change my mind, but once I've heard your suggestion, provided I haven't misunderstood it, I am aware of it and can change my mind or not at my own leisure, so trying to argue your case more forcibly won't help.
4) Scrivener is not "software-by-committee" and it is not open source. It is based on my personal vision of what I want for my dream writing software - it just happens that Scrivener has a fastastic user base whose suggestions have really helped refine that vision. There are some great software companies - such as the wonderful Hog Bay Software - who add features based on user votes, but - and I am very upfront about this - Literature & Latte is not one of them, and nor will it be. Features are not added based upon how many users press for them, but rather based upon whether or not I think the feature has a place in Scrivener. I base this on both how well I think the suggestion fits with Scrivener and could be integrated into the program, and also on how practical it would be to implement. You can politely try to convince me, but be aware that if I feel like I'm being bullied I might just direct you to the Cocoa documentation and give you tips on how to program your own app. With both this and (1) above in mind, please never reply to feature requests posted by others with nothing more than a "+1" - it adds absolutely nothing, and I'm not likely to spend many hours on hundreds of lines of code based on a two-second, two-character vote. If you have an opinion on a feature request, please express it politely, explaining exactly how you think it should work and why it would be useful.
5) The Windows version of Scrivener is, at this point in time, playing catch-up with the Mac version. This is simply a matter of how much time it takes to make software, and nothing more. The Mac version was released in (very) early 2007, whereas the Windows version was released nearly five years later, in the final months of 2011. That's a lot of development time that the Mac version has had all to itself, and so a conservative estimate of how long it would take the Windows version to catch up would not be too far off from those five years. In practice, we like to think it won't take quite that long because the development style on the Mac is, having nothing else quite like it, the one breaking the ice. The Windows version is following a proven path, ignoring all of the pitfalls and such that the Mac version has made, and has since reversed on in the, at the time of this writing, close to seven years of time it has been in the making. So in theory it should not take the Windows version quite as long, as it won't need to first implement an idea one way, and then another way a few years later, it can just go straight to the final destination.
Despite being able to code to a relatively stable and finished target (to be clear, the Mac development effort continues unabated, and so is a bit of a moving target!), the enormous effort that it takes to create complex software means even with a clear road-map, it takes a long time to get anything done. Scrivener for the Mac comprises hundreds of thousands of lines of code, and the Windows version sometimes has to "say" more in code than the Mac does, owing to the differences in platforms. The Mac, for instances, comes with a nearly complete word processing system built into it, whereas on Windows we had to code much of what you see in Scrivener from scratch. That right there is enough work to keep most small development companies busy for years.
To return to the point: there is no need to remind us of the fact that there is a feature on the Mac version that isn't yet in the Windows version, and post it as a "wish". We are well aware of our own features, and have these things plotted out far in advance. The fact that it is not in the Windows version yet means nothing, save for everything discussed in the prior paragraph: we still have years of work ahead of us! We thank you for your patience and understand on the matter.
Finally, remember that because I am one person, my time is limited and sometimes my replies will inevitably seem curt. I do my best not to seem rude, but hey, it happens. Follow the above rules and I am less likely to seem so.
I really do appreciate the suggestions that have helped make Scrivener better over the years - thank you for your continued support!
All the best,