To indicate that anyone who points out the failure of the windows version to keep up with the Mac version results in that person to be a failure is very flawed logic. And to say that a person should buy the IPad version so that they may a more up to date version is also flawed in so many ways as that version is limited. So, where is the logic? I guess it went out the plate glass window those people were looking out when they wrote those comments.
I tend to agree … it’s really not fair, only more sniping, to assume that someone is blaming problems that someone else imagines they have on the tool. That said…
This is just full of pure unproven assumption: Please tell us how you know that when the Windows version comes out, the Mac version will have new or better features than it does. What access do you have to L&L’s budget and personnel deployment? Have you tried the beta? Many users report that it is quite usable and safe (basically all the responses to the similarly constructed whinge here). It also remains to be seen whether or not they hit the end-of-August target.
Overall, I just find this childish. And I say that as a person who frequently has pretty childish outbursts himself; it does take one to know one.
No, it’s not. 
Yeah, no, you’re stating the obvious. It’s been that way for years, doncha know. You’re late to the choir. Try to keep up.
Nope. No way. * shakes head effusively * I never said that. Methinks too much time checking one’s reflection in the plate glass window leads to comprehension diffugulties.
To reiterate:
Ahh gotta love mac users putting down windows users for their frustration.
As quoted from Lee himself:
And here is it they missed the Q3 2019 date as well.
Lee also wrote:
That’s coming from Lee himself as to the differences. I wasn’t pulling that out of the air. In fact, I had only noted 3 updates, but according to Lee in July 2019 there were 6. I can’t say (don’t want to bother to check) if there has been more than 6 as of today. That would be a mute point at this time.
So, while mac users jump all over win users for expressing their frustrations, while they sit there with the latest and greatest upgrades and support, they need to take a good long look at why they want to chime in at all. Is it just to troll the windows users? Just to put down those frustrated customers? Why are they even on the windows board when they don’t even have the windows version other then to troll? Take a good long look in that mirror and remember for every finger you point at the windows users, there are 4 pointing back at you. Ask yourself just why you are here and why you find a reason to chime in when you have no invested interest in being here or in the version of the product itself.
Hmmm.
Getting a bit precious there suggesting Mac users have no right to be on the Win board, aren’t we
Mac users have every right to chime in when you start slagging the team and demanding ‘consequences’.
Many, myself included use Mac and Win, so have even more right to chime in.
I use Win 1.9, beta 3 and Mac 3 and find them all very useable.
Ahh, gotta love someone who grabs an argument that’s been dead for TWO WEEKS and stirs it up again. Can you point to someone in this thread who uses Mac only (and therefore, IYHO, has no right to speak here) and has put down Windows users for being frustrated? Sheesh.
But you do have consolation with Mac 3 so you don’t really have the same frustration as a 100% Win user. It wasn’t as annoying for me until I didn’t have a Mac.
They’re simply protecting their investment. They have paid a marginally higher amount of money for a better product, that it’s receiving regular updates, has all the bells and whistles, looks much better. Think what would happen if the development team decided enough is enough, and decided to stop further development in the mac platform until everything was as promised almost 3 years ago in the Windows sector.
That’s why they insist so much on their spiel that 1.9x does anything that any productive writer might need, that one should buy the program for what it currently does and not any future promises that might or might come true (even though many bought the program on the promise of a near windows - mac parity), that if your not happy, you may look elsewhere, that those who complain are frustrated writers, that no other windows program has the same functionalities etc, etc.
It doesn’t really work that way (in most cases I would say, but especially here). There isn’t some big “development team” that shifts around from one platform to the next, or can be assigned to divert all power to main engines, or whatever.
As it has been posted many times before: there is one guy that makes the Mac and iOS versions, and two guys making the Windows versions. Ceasing Mac development would do nothing. So there is nothing to “protect” here, in that nothing is in danger of being less cared for relative to how much work is put into a another software project.
SmartEdit Writer (Formally Atomic Scribbler) is the closest you’re going to get as it purposely set out to emulate the scrivener workflow experience. It doesn’t have a lot of the advanced features Scrivener does though (but has some unique ones of its own).
Outside of that, there really isn’t much competition for Scrivener which is probably part of the problem. Right now Scrivener’s workflow just makes so much sense over Word/Docs for lengthy projects like a novel and tools like text-to-speech are useful for self-editing.
But who knows what will happen in a year or two; maybe SmartEdit Writer or something else will be a viable alternative. Heaven knows that’s about when we’ll be seeing Scrivener 3 fully released on Windows anyway.
Please be careful with the antecedents to pronouns like “they.” Most of the people commenting in these threads are not Literature & Latte employees, and represent no views other than their own. It certainly is not an official position of Literature & Latte that people frustrated with any version of Scrivener are frustrated or failed writers!
Katherine
You’re right and I stand corrected. I never ever intended to convey that it ever was the official position of Literature & Latte. I apologise if anyone ever thought I intended to say so.
In all fairness to SmartEdit Writer, I don’t think it set out to emulate Scrivener. SmartEdit started out as Page Four, which was developed at around the same time as I was developing Scrivener. (I believe I even got the name “Snapshots” from Page Four back in the early days, in fact, even though the feature worked quite differently.) It’s been in development as long as Scrivener for Mac and is just trying to solve many of the same problems, so inevitably there is some similarity here and there. The developer is a very nice chap too.
Not good alternatives. Qt is a very stable and mature platform with long term viability. Targeting Win32 with Qt on top will lead to a very snappy and efficient application, which is good for both UI responsiveness and power consumption (for laptop use and the like).
I would not. And especially not those two. They’re both locked into .NET, meaning they require more computing power (thus also battery power) and memory, and they’re both subject to rapid change. WinForms is deprecated, and WPF is a mess to do complicated layouts like Scrivener has in.
C# does have the QtSharp library, allowing development of Qt applications in C#, but it’s still a CLR locked language with unnecessary overhead.
And the only real gain from using C# over C++ is getting a managed language. That’s only a library away in C++ if that’s what’s going to make the difference. But it’s not.
Xamarin is a flavor of the month. I would not lock myself into using that for a long term project.
That is highly subjective, and a function of how well versed you are with C++ vs C#. And it also depends highly on the coding standard followed. I have worked with C# code which left me crying, and with C++ code which is a marvel to read.
In summary, working with C++ and Qt has a few significant long term advantages. The application will be small and lean, and very efficient. There is no lock-in into anything but the standard Win32 libraries, making the application both future proof and portable (to Wine and the like), and very easy to run on any Windows or Windows-like system. And Qt is here to stay - but more importantly, if it’s not, and development of it were to die, the source is available and it can be maintained indefinitely. .NET may look alluring, but it’s not a good fit for an application that is intended to be around for decades. The long term maintenance burden is horrid.
Just want to say that I have been using the new Windows Beta parallel to the old Scrivener for Windows with some documents for quite a while. There is a difference between the two. This is a major overhaul and I’m glad that us Windows users will be able to use so many new features to keep us organized. Try using beta for a while as there is a learning curve. I suspect that some people will be asking for the old Scrivener when they don’t understand a new feature in 3.0.
It is impossible to please everybody!
I love the old Scrivener too. It has been my best writing friend for many years. I have no problem using it a bit longer. I am often surprised by how little the average user knows about all the features that are in it. They only look at what is “shiny new” without understanding the whole package.
I agree wholeheartedly, although I’ve been using the Beta exclusively since v7. I’ve been going back to 1.9+ to check on the activation issues. You know, just in case there’s a burp. I can produce meaningful output in either version.
To tell the truth, I quite like revisiting the v1.9 interface, but time and software moves on, and I’m antique enough as it is. I won’t be going back to it since “graduating” to the new version.
Telling us we are failures as writers because we dare to question the delayed release of a version that has been promised for two years is a sign of a toxic environment and cult thinking. Reading these posts is making me regret my purchase of Scrivener. Methinks it may be time to move to Google Docs. I can use my terrible writing skills to explain why I know longer use Scrivener!
Was anyone actually called a failure as a writer?
I and others suggested that you have a perfectly fine (much better than Google docs) writing environment in 1.9 and time spent bitching by some could be productively used actually writing.
No toxic environment and if you check, the only pushback was for those who attacked L&L and their staff. Those who politely expressed disappointment, but understood reality (myself included) were not pushed back against.
If you look at the overwhelming content of the L&L forums you will find friendly, polite, helpful discourse with Mac and Win users helping each other freely.
I’ve said it before, storming off to use a markedly inferior (for the type of writing Scrivener is designed for) product to prove a point is a bit of ‘cutting off nose to spite face’.
As for making threats of using your ‘writing skills’ to tell everyone why you left Scrivener, isn’t that sinking to the same or even greater depths you accuse forum members of??? You’re threatening to harm Scrivener because your feelings were hurt by some blunt talk. (NOT by L&L staff, I should emphasise)
mmm???
Did you read this thread at all? Or do you just willingly turn a blind eye to your compatriots and their jibes at people? This is just from this thread. There is other crap just like this in other threads.
I swear, sometimes it’s like wandering into a cult here.