The people behind the Manuscripts app tried to do exactly that back in 2014. It was to be a writing app dedicated to scientific writing and fully integrated with Papers 3 reference app. They released an early beta version for free but vey early decided to start selling the beta as version 1 although it was still a very buggy beta. Users became increasingly frustrated because of all the bugs and complained in the user forum, which after some time made the developers close down the user forum. The developers finally had to give up and realized in 2017 that they weren’t gonna make it. So they decided that the app should be an open source project instead and said they were gonna reveal the code in 2018, which by the way hasn’t happened yet. But the app is still out there, for free, if you want to test a different kind of writing app.
Didn’t say anything about early beta. Something that has been worked on for a year can only be an early beta if no work has been done whatsoever. Which is obviously not the case here.
Besides, steveshank was talking about “a really good product”, which implies strive for perfection. 
That is a good thing per se, but you see how long Windows users have been complaining. Have people had this new release, even if a bit buggy in some scenarios, they would have had an ability to roll back to the previous version and wait further. I think there would’ve been more understanding. Otherwise people feel neglected compared to other users. I don’t think this makes for happy customers.
There are lots of apps for Windows and Android that are not available for Mac or iOS, but that doesn’t make me feel neglected. Personally I actually think this kind of complaining is a bit childish. If Scrivener 3 is so important for you, there is a simple solution. Buy a Mac! If running Windows is more important than running Scrivener 3, stay with Windows and Scrivener 1.9!
Life isn’t fair or juste, it only is what it is.
I’m not sure I understand the complaint here. The public beta is available for download now. That is exactly the code you would get if we released the program today, except that it’s free, and admits that it is beta-quality code.
If you don’t want to use beta code, that’s fine, but it doesn’t really make sense to argue that we should release the software now while simultaneously refusing to use the code that we have released.
Katherine
Yes, I love Scrivener and I don’t want to dump it, especially since there isn’t anything else that’s comparable.
But it is frustrating to wait and wait and wait for the promised parity with Mac and, after a year, be told there’s still no plan to actually release v3.
I’m sure the Mac developers haven’t been sitting on their hands this past year waiting for Windows to catch up. So, will Windows v3 be released before Mac v3.1? I doubt it.
But, hey, we can always use the perpetual beta. 
Or buy a Mac. 
There are competitors and thus alternatives for those who are discontended with Scrivener 1.9 and don’t want to use the beta:
Hi Jaaaarne,
Couple of responses to your points.
But this isn’t really applicable to Scrivener, is it. When first released Scrivener was certainly a groundbreaking, innovative app. However, 10 years or so down the road, Scrivener is now a mature product with a large, sophisticated customer base, some of whom make their living using Scrivener. I am grateful that L&L has not succumbed to the temptation of prematurely releasing a buggy product for increased revenue.
By “strengthen the team” do you mean “hire more developers”? The thing is, and of course this is complete speculation on my part, I suspect L&L is just about as big as Keith wants it to be, although I could see them trying to hire an iOS developer, to allow Keith to focus on Mac. But finding the right person is not a trivial undertaking.
There seems to be a plethora of markdown editors out there now, so it seems like a good choice. Best of luck, I hope you find something that works for you.
Jim
“Consistency is not a human trait.” - Maude
There is a plan. Releasing the betas is part of that plan. What they’re not telling us, and what people are feeling entitled to (and it is that sense of entitlement that is the reason WHY they are not telling us) is what their current planned dates are. I realize that the dates are all some people are interested in, but L&L have been very straightforward from the get-go this time that they would not be giving dates, that the process would take as long as it takes.
If you have been using the various betas as they have been released, you can see clearly that there is a significant amount of progress being made and the trajectory for catching up to the Mac version is actually pretty good.
But to say there’s not a a plan is not accurate.
I’m not the topic starter. And you’ve missed my point entirely. Not to mention that not having a version for an OS at all and having an inferior version for an OS are two quite different things.
Also. To buy a Mac I need to stop eating for about three months. Kindly get out of your first world bubble from time to time, will you.
I think you’ve mixed me up with somebody else.
I was talking about managing customers’ expectations, which, frankly, L&L is doing a so-so job of. That’s all. Communication to the customers is important. See another user’s post below. They’re speaking about being frustrated at empty promises. This is customer communication and managing expectations. How come L&L doesn’t see it? Talk to people, give them something other than “one day we will release it”.
I was not talking about refusing Windows beta. Simply because I’m on Linux 3/4 of time.
Nobody promised it will be an easy feat. But you see, if the project is growing, if they want to cover more platforms, if the bar keeps being raised, then hiring more professionals is inevitable. Otherwise a bottleneck is created. Two good devs will be better than one. Three good devs will be better than two.
Thank you. I’ve found a couple of apps that look promising, I will try them out this November. Although I do realise that switching to a new software before NaNo is a bit of a crazy move. But then, NaNo itself is a crazy idea, isn’t.
Anyway, I’m really thankful for Scrivener. It has changed the way I write, and it has been a great experience. Hope everything works out in the best way possible.
Hope to return to it some day in future, when more OS are supported. 
Like many topics in software development, this seemingly intuitive statement is incorrect more often than it is correct. Even good devs require ramp-up time to figure out how to work with the existing code, and for a non-trivial codebase like Scrivener, that time is typically measured in months – possibly even years, given the specific requirements for experience in the framework being used, expertise in the text editing system, learning the customizations and overrides of the text editing system, etc. In the long run, of course, having those experienced devs will help, but in the short term, adding bodies usually decreases overall efficiency during the learning curve.
If you haven’t read it, track down a copy of The Mythical Man-Month and peruse it. It does a wonderful job of explaining why throwing more developers at a problem is usually the wrong solution to a time crunch.
Hi Jaaaarne,
The thing is, if they must have the new release now, it’s available now! And for no additional cost!
Albeit as you say a bit buggy in some scenarios.
Jim
Am I right to assume that at least there will be a new beta for Scrivener 3/Windows once the current beta expires?
Yes.
Katherine
Quick question: is the Windows Scriv 3 beta able to export ePub 3 files?
If not, does the iOS version of Scrivener export ePub 3 files? (I have an iPad Air 2)
I need to produce a valid ePub 3 file for upload to IngramSpark for publishing. So far I haven’t been able to find a way to produce an ePub 3 file that doesn’t generate errors in ePub validators. Ingram requires ePub 3 files to pass the validation at this site:
Thanks!
Happy to see they won’t release “buggy” versions. It is the worst kind of strategy, breaking the trust of your customers.
The current beta is very very slow and 1.9 is still a very good product. And although some new features of Scrivener 3 would be very helpful for my next writing phase, I’ll just stick with 1.9. I do not have time to beta-test a product.
The news that Scrivener 3 for Windows will not after all be available in 2018 is very disappointing indeed.
As for Macs, I bought a new Macbook Pro in July.
And in August.
And in September.
And in October.
And in November.
In each of them, the “3rd generation improved keyboard” failed, generally starting with “E” and space bar.
There are no portable Macs without the butterfly keyboard left, which meant I had to learn to live with Windows. Scrivener is the program I use 80% of the time. The current beta is almost what I would like it to be 
Also its current price of zero euro works very well for me.
As for release date, it’s been mentioned that it will come “later in 2018”, now that we know it won’t, people are complaining and demanding the “real” date. Which means that either we get a date, then it doesn’t work 100% yet and we’ll complain, or we won’t get a date and we’ll also complain.
I’m good as things are. (I also have a Hackintosh for the final compile unless Win version is out in time, which for me means beginning of February the latest.) (And I click Save every ten seconds or so.)
For me, personally, I’m glad the devs are taking the time they need before publishing v3 as a finished commercial product. I’d have it no other way.
I’m just wondering, however, if anyone might tell me about the experience of using the 2.9 beta that ends mid December. Does it function well enough to actually transfer work and use it on a daily basis as a main editor?
Beta release notes say that the latest release is pretty much done, except for compile-related parts. And if I’m not planning on the project I have in mind being in a state to do that for a while still, do you people who have actually tried or are using the beta think that it is stable enough and functional enough to give it a go?
I have the 1.x paid and have been doing a lot of work in it for years now. And will most certainly buy v3 come release day. But I do have need of some of the features in v3 to get on from the state my work is in right now. And finding workarounds that will have to be manually changed and fixed after finally being able to move on to v3 isn’t really an option. It’ll disrupt the project and my creative process too much, I fear. Too much work involved.
So I’m willing to try a beta that is at least almost as solid as, and very close to being, a release candidate, as long as it is stable enough that I can do my thing without risking corrupted files, lost progress and the like. And I do not yet need to worry about compilation issues.
In relation to what I specify as my personal user case, what do you users with experience of the latest betas (and hopefully support staff/devs) think I should do? Should I stick with 1.9.x or should I try the 2.9.x beta, so long as I don’t have use of the compile feature yet?
And, also, have anyone experienced any problems with compatibility when switching between betas? Or should one perhaps expect a bump in the road - of any kind - when finally moving from beta to final release ?
I’d recommend checking out the Beta forum and seeing if there are any discussions there that look like they’d interfere with your particular working practices.
As far as stability and practical functionality goes – I’ve been using the beta pretty much exclusively ever since it first came out, and have never seen a crash or experienced loss of work / data; at this point, my daily backups to 1.9.x are more a force of habit than anything else. Almost all the bugs I’ve had issues with have been squashed by now, and the few that remain are minor at worst. Speaking only from my own personal experience (but of course others may vary), I honestly can’t see any reason not to use and enjoy it.
As to compatibility from beta to beta, I’ve certainly not had any issues at least since they implemented the in-program updates. Again, others may vary, and I’m always careful to back up before updating, just to be safe, but it seems pretty smooth and seamless to me thus far.
Hope that helps.