Who want a Linux release version?

[FunkyStickman]

I'd pony up cash to have a non-expiring version of what I have now. I'm very happy with it.

Of course, an official version would be nice, but as a regular Linux user, I'm pretty much used to half-assed software. Scrivener is already light years ahead of anything else in this category.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'll pay as soon as they decide to take my money. I've more than gotten that much out of it.

[Graybyrd]

but as a regular Linux user, I'm pretty much used to half-assed software. Scrivener is already light years ahead of anything else in this category.

All rants aside (what a temptation!) I generally agree that the Linux software 'verse is pretty spotty. There are a few exceptions. What will make a huge difference in user attitudes towards Linux as a viable desktop OS alternative is when developers of notable commercial software (such as Scriv) port their product as a commercial Linux offering. Far too long we've heard the wail in the night: "I'd switch, but my job/project/boss demands that I use XYZ app, and it's only available for Windows!"

I realize that I'll incur the curses of Richard Stallman for saying that, and I'll surely wake up with the fleas of 10,000 camels infesting my shorts ... but I said it, and I'm glad! Linux needs more world-class software offerings. And software developers deserve to earn a living at it.

(I'll be in the bomb shelter out back for the next few weeks. )

[AdLibitur]

Just to cast my votw in the pool . . .

I WANT AN OFFICIAL/SUPPORTED LINUX VERSION TOO!

It might help to gain support for the lLinux version if the BETA Linux version were listed/advertised along with the windows and mac versions.

And yes, I'm willing to pay a fair price for a fully supported, wiz-bang commercial version!

[kataja]

I'd pay immediately for a linux version.

The current beta has its glitches - so if it is released as a commercial one, it should have a reduced price compared with the others.

I'd prefer not to use Scrivener via wine for two reasons, one technical the other political.

Technical is that wine adds another layer needing resources and having its bugs and glitches, political is that if I buy the windows version it would be "sales for windows version", not showing that there is a dedicated linux user using the program.

(actually I tried to donate money for linux development - the sum I would have paid with the Nano winner discount, but it turned out to be technically impossible (It was impossible to pay with a credit card, I definitely did not wish to create a paypal account which would have been left hanging)).

As for that "linux users do not wish to pay", it is simply not true: there have been e.g. Valve game bundles sometimes including games for linux (those "pay as much you think this is worth"). Linux users have always paid clearly larger sums in average, even though the bunches have been smaller!

[Monolecte]

Technical is that wine adds another layer needing resources and having its bugs and glitches, political is that if I buy the windows version it would be "sales for windows version", not showing that there is a dedicated linux user using the program.

That's all, folks! I'll never add a layer of bugs on my Linux. I used Wine first year after switch, and finaly, uninstall it for ever.

As for that "linux users do not wish to pay", it is simply not true: there have been e.g. Valve game bundles sometimes including games for linux (those "pay as much you think this is worth"). Linux users have always paid clearly larger sums in average, even though the bunches have been smaller!

I'm paying for Antidote http://www.antidote.info/antidote-8-v4-pour-linux, a great french language software : It's the best and they developp and support a linux version. When I find a great tool, I never had a problem to pay for using it.

[garpu]

One good thing that came out of Steam, GoG and Humble Bundle (aside from nifty games being ported) is putting to rest the myth that linux users don't pay for software. We most certainly do. And add me to the crowd who'd pay for a Linux Scrivener release. (Even though I've already got Windows and Mac keys, too.)

Hell, I'd throw in cookies and a beer, should any of the devs make it to my city, if there's a Scapple port.

[happydemic]

At least at the moment, the Linux release is not really a beta but an unsupported, free release with no bugfixes and minimal development beyond cross-platform compatibility. That is very gracious of L&L and works well for this user.

I don't think the above is entirely accurate. There have been bug fixes for the linux platform. But the L&L position has been "it is not our priority". And as stated by KB and Lee, the Linux version is keeping up with the Windows version feature set at major points.

You're very right, some bugs have been fixed. But there's no commitment to fixing them - quite reasonably - and indeed there's no 'official' means to report them (since this forum is unofficial). All of which is very different from most betas. Can we think of it as a free, unsupported 'take it as you find it' release?

But I didn't intend to engage in quasi-Kremlinology to uncover the secrets of the L&L development strategy (are they planning to take over the world, one scrivening at a time?). I just wanted to make the point that Scrivener on Linux is less like getting a month's free membership when a new gym opens and more like the manager letting you in for free provided you don't make a mess and stay out of the aerial yoga class.

[Hax Templar]

I signed up for this forum just to say I want a linux release version!

[shaviro]

I will just say, me too! I primarily write on my Ubuntu machine; I also have a Mac, but that is mostly for the kids to use; I really only use it to sync my iPad and iPhone. I have purchased Scrivener Mac, but I cannot use it that often. If/when Scrivener for iOS comes out, I will definitely want to be able to sync three-way between Ubuntu, MacOS, and iOS.

[emmaus]

I want a Linux release version and I'm ready to pay for it.
Please, You can release this version before the end of year?

[Meredin]

I would be very happy to pay for a Linux version!

[prisma]

I use a laptop running only Ubuntu 15.04 for all my writing projects. I use Libre Office + FocusWriter to do the bulk of my work. Scrivener is amazing. It helps me to keep my work organized.

Dear developers, shut up and take my money!

I will pay for a Linux version of Scrivener as soon as it is available. I love Ubuntu and I love Scrivener, how on earth I would not buy it?

[cellfourteen]

I think buying (or subscribing to) Scrivener for Linux sounds acceptable. After all, it's a dedicated software for writers. I work quite a lot with LibreOffice, and I am happy with it. As a day job, I do literary translations on LibreOffice. I wrote my first novel and I am currently writing my second novel on it. But it's not a software for writers. Not that I didn't try using Scrivener for Linux for the last years (in fact I wrote half a novel on it), but it never seemed minimally rock solid enough to trust my work with it. Paying, even for the current Linux version, would be a way to be sure that someone would take a look and eventually fix small but crippling problems in essential functionality about the work flow, compatibility, correctly exporting to two or three industry-standard document formats.

[pictograph]

I would also pay for a linux release version.

[AaronMFeld]

I do, and pleased to pay for it, but only when the author's consider their creation ready.