Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:04 am Post
Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:26 am Post
Suppose there were a simpler version of Scrivener - without so many options and perhaps with not many more features than the iOS version. But suppose this simpler version had iCloud support and could sync as seamlessly as other iCloud apps do (but also that this meant that it could not store research files inside a project because of the potential file size). Would that appeal?
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:13 pm Post
sidderke wrote:I think I would, but it would depend on of course which features it has. When Scrivener iOS got released, I was actually happy that it has all the features I used (importing research, corkboard, notes and synopsis cards, a way of having split screen in the app). If for instance, Scrivener Light, hypothetically, doesn't allow for research or doesn't allow the corkboard, it would't do what I need to do and I wouldn't be a customer. And of course everyone has his own features he *needs* and *likes* (2 different things).
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:16 pm Post
kewms wrote:Sadly, the Research capabilities -- specifically the diversity of file types in the Research folder -- are a major obstacle to iCloud support.
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:26 pm Post
sidderke wrote:kewms wrote:Sadly, the Research capabilities -- specifically the diversity of file types in the Research folder -- are a major obstacle to iCloud support.
Can I ask why, out of curiosity? Or is that too technical of an answer?
Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:08 pm Post
mbbntu wrote:johnnyalpha wrote:the majority of your user base are legacy users who don't want frequent changes made to their well-loved and nurtured software tools every month or quarter
How do you know that? I would have thought that only extensive research could tell you that for certain.
Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:13 pm Post
sidderke wrote:Can I ask why, out of curiosity? Or is that too technical of an answer?
JJSlote wrote:A couple of folks have taken Keith's post to suggest that he was floating the idea of a lighter edition of Scrivener without a research section. But I took his words to mean only that research files could no longer be stored within the project. So we'd still be able to import research files as shortcuts, tag and cross reference them as always, and view them where possible in a Scrivener pane. But Scrivener would be spared the overhead of synching each research file via iCloud or Dropbox.
kewms wrote:Well, the relevant commands on the Format menu are in the Line and Paragraph Spacing sub-menu. The idea that line spacing and paragraph spacing belong together doesn't seem radical to me.
isagirl wrote:I'm not sure you care much about the philosophical end of the argument (nor is there any particular reason you must) but it is fairly important to me. I am obsessive about my writing.
isagirl wrote:While I appreciate the generalisation, I cannot wholeheartedly agree. As there have always been, there many different kinds of users.
isagirl wrote:Serving as an alternative to Ulysses (even just compared to the payment paradigm) is ground I hope you do not cede... To the extent Literature and Latte's paradigm resulted in the current version of Scrivener it was responsible for the most fundamental and positive life-changing shift any piece of software has managed to cause for me. If what I have to eventually do is stick the current version of macOS and Scrivener in a virtual machine and sandbox it off from the internet and the world for the rest of my life I will do it. But that would be most unfortunate.
Silverdragon wrote:Regarding ease of sync: have you looked at how Ulysses handles its external folders feature?
Silverdragon wrote:Nor do I suggest that full rich text not be available, merely that it be hidden by default... And somehow apply changes to the default formatting automatically to all extant documents in a project.
johnnyalpha wrote:So Scrivener has to balance itself on this wobbling, flexible divide between the old and new, the traditional and the modern, the quick hit of an expresso feature vs. the maturing of a fine product.
Kinsey wrote:Earlier this year I published the third academic monograph I've written entirely in Scrivener, so you can count me as another extremely satisfied customer/user. And I'm managing just fine without deeper reference software integration
lunk wrote:A new but interesting model is the one chosen by the team behind the Agenda app. When you pay, you get the app in its current shape, plus any new features added within the next 12 months.
Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:21 pm Post
KB wrote:Your interpretation is correct. I'd always want to be able to *view* research files in another pane inside Scrivener. But to play well with iCloud and improve syncing, they'd just need to be stored outside of the project.
Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:13 pm Post
kewms wrote:KB wrote:Which raises an immediate support issue when -- as will inevitably happen -- a user manages to break the link between the two and thinks the research files are "gone."
Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:26 pm Post
KB wrote:One thing to remember is that my aims now are no different from when I first set out: to make writing software I love myself. And all of the core things I wanted from that software fifteen to twenty years ago are still the things I want now.
Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:32 pm Post
So the issue here is carrying your 'old' desktop PC/chunky laptop users (one-time install+licence, user pulls updates etc) with you on major feature updates or revised subscription models without upsetting them, whilst keeping your feature set and platform fresh enough to attract more contemporary users with smartphones, tablets, Chromebooks etc (= cloud/SaaS/recurring subs/push updates). I'm loathe to say the former are physically older and the latter are younger! There will of course be exceptions.
Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:12 pm Post
KB wrote:It's something I do care about, and it's one of the reasons I'm always going to prefer apps that you install (I find it bizarre that some people now find this old-fashioned). We have a couple of new competitors trying to nip at our heels these days, but they are web-based. Web-based apps make me nervous, though - your writing ends up on someone else's servers. And I have seen from questions asked of the developers of these apps that they have access to all the writing done by their users. That would be enough to put me off ever doing serious writing in them. (I won't name the apps because I'm not going to give the breath of publicity to apps that have pages on their sites dedicated to slagging us off and calling us out-of-date. Suffice to say that they think they are new but in fact follow paradigms I built Scrivener to get away from. Miaow etc.) We'd never want to be part of any subscription service that claimed even the smallest part of control over our users' work. Much better to leave it to the user to decide which syncing services they trust.
Sat Aug 15, 2020 7:20 am Post
Sun Aug 16, 2020 4:42 pm Post
[*]The Windows version is hugely overdue and this is hurting the faith our users have in us. And yet it’s an impossible situation. I don’t want to go into internal matters, but there is no way of throwing money at it that will fix this. The Windows update *will* be released, I hasten to add, but we need seriously to evaluate how to avoid this situation in the future.
In total there are 4 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 4 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 1048 on Mon Feb 06, 2012 9:07 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests