[NB] Need update for Windows Beta 8 before Sept.30th please

[p8092040]

Hi, I'm now using Scrivener for Windows Beta 8 as my main Scrivener, as I find it better than the 1.x version.

But, Beta 8 will stop working on Sept. 30th, 2018, I believe.

Please release Beta 9 or a version of Beta 8 that removes the Sept. 30th limitation.

Thank you.

[MimeticMouton]

New beta releases typically come out shortly before the previous one expires (the 30th September date means that the current Beta 8 runs *through* the 30th, expiring October 1st); we anticipate Beta 9 coming out at the end of the month. It will have an expiry date, as all the betas do, to prevent indefinitely running an outdated build meant for bug testing, but of course that date will be a month or two out, and the beta cycle will repeat.

[Mick]

Maybe you ought to add a bold Relax, people, we never fail to release a new version in time for the current one's expiration to the Scrivener 3 Announcements post.

[rdale]

Maybe you ought to add a bold Relax, people, we never fail to release a new version in time for the current one's expiration to the Scrivener 3 Announcements post.

I think they missed releasing before the deadline once during the v1 beta cycle (in some time zones, but not world-wide), and we, the optimistic, oooooooo-shiney!, what-could-POSSIBLY-go-wrong?! group of very patient Scrivener Beta "testers" have never fully recovered.

[monomox]

Oh, I feel the same way as the OP. Thanks for the reply, though. I will wait patiently. In L&L we trust.

[ListeningGarden]

No need to worry, they've made the deadline with many hours to spare for each of the 3.0 beta builds and I have little reason to suspect it would suddenly become an issue!

[mhtritter]

Oh!


For the record, one more user here who completely didn't intuitively understand this. I came here to find the solution to what I thought was an extremely dire situation.

I agree with that idea that somewhere it should be stated explicitly, rather than implicitly (at best) , that using the Beta isn't going to leave your project in a black hole of unrecoverable 3.0 formatting.

[RussWhaley]

I've discovered my stress level goes down a great deal if I do an all-project export and/or compile before the bi-monthly expiration as a "CYA" maneuver. Should something go wrong, I will be inconvenienced... but I will not lose a bunch of work.

Let there be peace... in the valley...

[devinganger]

Y'all, this would be just one of the many reasons they say not to use the beta versions for stuff you care about.

[Carnacki]

Given the very slow progress of this beta, it is very clear that, on the Windows side at least, it is just a hobbyist development project.

There is nothing wrong with that at all (far from it), and I also know that aligning the Mac and Windows versions of the software is a very big task (made even bigger by the fact that the Windows development is not full time).

But can someone then explain what the license fee is for? I understand that you are making a complex software project, and that is deserves to be a paid product, but on the Windows side, is the Windows licence money going towards Windows development? The beta is taking so very long to develop, I'm just wondering what we are actually paying for.

[rdale]

Given the very slow progress of this beta, it is very clear that, on the Windows side at least, it is just a hobbyist development project.

That's patently untrue. Take it from someone who's been on these forums since before there was a Windows version. You're not looking at a corporation with hundreds, or tens, or even just 10 programmers to share the load. There are 3. Small businesses like this, working on software that breaks the mold in many ways, have to take time to get things right. It's not a hobby for them.

There is nothing wrong with that at all (far from it), and I also know that aligning the Mac and Windows versions of the software is a very big task...

It is a huge task. Windows doesn't provide the same infrastructure that Macs do, so the Windows team has to license and integrate, or invent from scratch those features that Mac programmers get for free. They also have to compromise with regard to the placement of UI elements, file format, etc... taking the lead from the Mac version.

the Windows development is not full time.

False. There is one full-time developer (Lee), and one part-time developer (Tiho) for Windows. Compare that to the Mac team, composed of: Keith.
https://www.literatureandlatte.com/about-us

But can someone then explain what the license fee is for? [...]The beta is taking so very long to develop, I'm just wondering what we are actually paying for.

... The fee is for a license to the released version, not for the Beta. You can buy a version 1 license now and get an upgrade for free when v3 comes out, but you never had to pay for the beta.

[Carnacki]

Thanks for the reply and explaining things very clearly.

Is the reason for the delay in the new Windows version merely down to the complexity of the project, then? The reason this comes to mind to today is that the current beta still has bugs in it that were reported 10 months ago, which reminds me how long the beta process has been going on.

[rdale]

I can't speak for the developers, but my guess is that the only reason we even had a "beta" (which I recall was considered more of an "Alpha" release) last December is because the Mac version 3 was ready, and Keith (the Mac developer and creator of Scrivener) wasn't about to delay its release for over a year for no good reason. If it had only been one month's lag between Mac v3 and Windows v3, I'm sure he would have waited.

My opinion is that Scrivener 3 for Windows is still an "Alpha" release, since there are still major sections of functionality that remain unimplemented.

But yeah, Scrivener is unlike most software out there that looks like it. There is (now) a full styles system built on a rich text editor, nestled into an environment that resembles a modern programmer's integrated development environment more than it does your typical word processor. Doing that would be hard in the best of circumstances (i.e. developing on the Mac), but when trying to match everything on another platform feature-for-feature, it's truly epic. If this wasn't hard, there would be more Scrivener imitators on Windows that go beyond superficial resemblances.

[kewms]

I can't speak for the developers, but my guess is that the only reason we even had a "beta" (which I recall was considered more of an "Alpha" release) last December is because the Mac version 3 was ready, and Keith (the Mac developer and creator of Scrivener) wasn't about to delay its release for over a year for no good reason. If it had only been one month's lag between Mac v3 and Windows v3, I'm sure he would have waited.

Releasing a Windows beta was also intended to help accommodate our dual-platform users, since Win Scrivener 1.9.8 can't use the Scrivener 3 project format.

Katherine