ArgentArts wrote:I probably shouldn't jump in, either, but why not? I own a license of v1 of Scrivener and have been using it for years. For what I use it for, it's great. Over the last year, I've been using the beta for v3. Again, for what I use it for, it's been great, too. So, I like the software and will be upgrading to v3 when it (eventually) is released.
Having said that, there is really no excuse for a development cycle taking this long for a piece of software like Scrivener. People can talk about how complex it is or isn't, but that shouldn't really be the issue. A lot more complex software gets developer in a lot less time (even with lone-developers). It's been literally years that v3 has been in development. What is this, the Duke Nukem of digital writing? (If you don't know about Duke Nukem Forever, well, it was in development from 1996 to 2011 and was considered vaporware!)
From the customer's perspective, it matters little how complex the development is or isn't. What matters is the company has said, several time, in several ways, over several years, that v3 will soon be released. They even had a campaign offering v3 for free if v1 was purchased (indicating that v3 was soon to be released). From a customer's perspective, especially prospective costumers, this is off-putting, to say the least.
As someone who rarely comes to this forum (mainly to check and see if an actual release is pending), it is even more off-putting to see how some here flock to attack anyone who would state their dissatisfaction with the delay in release of v3. It's like a bunch of bullies trying to keep the peace by attempting to silence the voices of those who are dissatisfied. Yes, there is a v3 beta that we can all use. I think that's great. Yes, those that are dissatisfied could be using this beta for free while waiting for v3 to eventually be released. But none of that addresses the actual dissatisfaction and, frankly, these people should be allowed to voice their concerns without being attacked. If someone does not want to use a beta, for whatever reason, whether their reason is a good one or not, they should not have to. Just because there is a beta does not invalidate their reason for being dissatisfied.
For the first few years using Scrivener v1, I never bothered with the forum. I didn't have a need, I suppose. But when I saw that v3 was pending (years ago), I started to visit to see if I could get news about the update and, later, to check on the beta. After a few visits, that's when I started to see the attacks on those that voiced their dissatisfaction. It's a real turn-off. Until visiting this forum, I had a great impression of L&L and Scrivener, but the attacks by some members, including some of the snide remarks here on the forum from someone who works with L&L, causes me to rethink that position.
I'm still planning on upgrading to v3. But some of the voices from this community make it a more difficult choice. Thankfully, I can use the software without having to come here. And that's a sad statement to make, when you think about it. A community like this should be quite welcoming, even to those that have a gripe about the continued delays of v3.
I agree with EVERYTHING you said.
In fact, I registered just to post after years of lurking doing the same as you.
I'm a game designer and developer specialized in narrative design and currently studying software engineering.
A software development project that constantly gives estimates and then starts to delay the release is a project that is badly managed and badly developed.
The only reason I can think for the amount of delays WITHOUT a cancelation of a project, is manipulation by the development team, manipulation by the project manager or ineptitude by the stakeholders. Delaying a release is a loss of money. That's why is software development it's preferable to make cuts and compromises than to delay SO MANY TIMES. SPECIALLY when you take into account the great amount of agile development frameworks, there is just no excuse for a software development taking up so long.
It doesn't matter the reason.
Why was Duke Nukem Forever delayed so many times? Because it was badly managed and the development process had to be started again and again.
Is the delay because of the coding style? Fire the development team and hire one that is capable of refactoring. or fire the manager/lead and hire one that is able to tell the team how to refactor and why.
Is the delay because of lack of communication between the team members? Fire the manager/lead and hire one that knows how to use different platforms.
Is the delay because the framework chosen to develop the program lacks the needed libraries/integrations/architecture/etc to code all the required functions? Fire the manager and hire one that knows how to choose a framework.
I can't think of ANY issue where a project manager/lead that delays a project SO MUCH, and fails to deliver a product on ANY date is not responsible and shouldn't be fired. SPECIALLY if hired by a small company and if he has a small development team. The amount of money lost on this project must be HUGE.