A few small things

The program is wonderful, thanks.

I’ve been using it 6 days a week for a few months. Here are just a few things I would like:

-In split-screen mode, an option to designate swapping out the left or right panel only. It’s my error, but I am constantly thinking I have activated the left screen, for instance, and when I select a new file in the binder, the right screen changes because I was still in that window. Designating one pane as the swapping pane, via a toggle or something, would cut down on this mistake.

-I’m sure this has been asked for already, but a triple pane would be nice, either 3 columns, or the ability to create upper and lower panes in a column to do 3 or 4 separate screens.

-It seems too easy to delete a file in the binder. I can always drag it out of the trash, but I have a 100 file list and I won’t know where it was exactly. If a warning exists currently, I guess I should find it!

-Searching globally within a Scrivner project is easy. But switching from a global search to a local search within a certain doc in the binder is a little hard to figure out. There are so many variables in the search window, you may take a look at how to simplify, or separate out global search and file-specific search. Searching is the only part of Scrivener that isn’t easier for me to use than MS Word.

Sorry if this is redundant to prior posts. :smiley:

Thanks for your feedback.

View > Binder Affects is what you are after.

Not going to happen, I’m afraid. Arbitrary view splitting would cause all sorts of havoc. Controls in split views have a way of going haywire unless the maximum and minimum sizes of the views are constrained. In order for Scrivener to run happily on a 12" screen as well as on a larger one, this means that the minimum constraints make it very difficult to have more than two panes. Besides, the current two-pane system is hard coded. It couldn’t be changed without rebuilding the entire program. Anyway, before Scrivener, you couldn’t see different types of documents in more than one view. :slight_smile:

I’m surprised how many users find this so difficult. I don’t think I’ve ever accidentally hit the delete key. Still, for the next update I’ve changed it so that to delete you now have to use cmd-delete, to match the behaviour in the Finder.

Searching in Scrivener works much the same as it does in Mail. I don’t really see how this is difficult. You do a global search by typing in the toolbar search field. Your documents appear in the search results. You select them and hit cmd-F to find individual search items - just as in Mail. I have no plans to change this, at least not in any 1.x release.

Thanks again - glad you like it over all!

All the best,


Thanks for the replies. Scrivener has really opened up my project. I spent 3 months putting years worth of on-off writing into one master Scrivener document, with a timeline of folders and subfolders in the binder. I can’t think of a better way to get this book done.

Your reminder about the binder affects made my day. I’ve done the tutorial a couple of times, but still it’s easy to forget every feature. So thanks for your reminder.

I ran into a guy at a coffee shop here in L.A. He was using Scrivener for screenwriting. He said people he knows are buying Macs to use it. (He was buzzing about the back-forth integration with Final Draft.)

Regarding the multiple panes issue, I do feel for people using any word processor on a 12" screen. I have 2 monitors, and I would guess anyone working seriously at home is using as much. So, a feature that would unlock that potential, an optional feature, would be welcome. But of course, any suggestion is made with the knowledge that it may be difficult to implement, or not worth the trouble in the end.

Search, what can I tell you. I live on my computer but have had a hiccup there with Scrivener. I do get search to work, it’s not that. Just feels a bit harder. I am willing for it to be user error…!

I agree, the rock-solid aspect of Scrivener is the best feature. If nothing changed, it would still be invaluable.

Best regards,
C. Simpson

Not to be argumentative, but I think you’d be surprised. The vast majority of writers I know use laptops exclusively, without a second external monitor. Some do use use dual monitor desktop setups - there are a few people on this forum, yourself obviously included, who’ve mentioned it - but I’ve never got the impression it’s a majority, in either pro or amateur circles.

(Terry Pratchett uses six monitors, but that’s hardly representative…! :wink: )

I think you might be surprised, too. I’m using a 24" iMac with a 19" secondary monitor. Of course I’m just one example, but the reaction to my setup suggests that plenty of other writers would go that way if they had the space and/or finances for it.

That’s a big “if,” though. I’m fortunate enough to have a largish dedicated office. Plenty of writers have to settle for the kitchen table and/or the local coffee shop. And of course the writers at the local coffee shop are the ones with the most easily observable habits.


I use my MacBook Pro 15" these days, though I started with a 12" iBook, but I wire up my MBPro to a 24" monitor regularly. The two-pane set up works as well on both, and I don’t really see any need to change that. At any rates, I won’t be doing so. :slight_smile:

All the best,

I know I have accidentally deleted things from the Binder before, but wouldn’t do so with Cmd-Delete. Not sure whether it is because I accidentally hit delete when I want another key (I agree this seems unlikely).

I suspect in my case (although I don’t remember specific instances of it happening), it might be that Iforget the binder has focus, so as I read over the work, I see something I don’t like, hit delete, and rather than deleting the text, the file disappears from the binder :smiley:

Either way, Cmd-Delete prevents this.

Based on something else the Original Poster said, is it possible to implement a restore option?
i.e. you find something in Trash, right click, choose ‘Restore’, and it pops back to where it came from. I can immediately see a few potential problems with this: (a) stuff in trash would need to be treated differently when right-clicking to everything else in the binder, and I assume at the moment the binder uses the same code everywhere; and (b) the ‘original location’ itself might have been deleted, renamed, shifted, etc. which could make returning it difficult/impossible.

So all in all, probably a dud idea, but thought I’d bring it up anyway.



Great idea. This way, one could see one’s whole novel at the same time…!

Interesting. I honestly wouldn’t - I get distracted easily enough, the last thing I want is another screen I can have Peggle running 24/7 :wink: - and as you say, the kitchen table/coffee shop factor is obviously a limitation. I have a dedicated study, and could easily fit another monitor in if I wanted, but I don’t really see the benefit (for me - obviously some people do).

Nevertheless, I can honestly say that outside of this forum, I’ve never met a writer with a dual-screen desktop setup. Maybe I just hang out with poverty-stricken writers :wink:

Yeah, I didn’t mean to imply I was a high-on-the-hog writer because of a 2-monitor set-up :smiley:
I have a Dell 2007 and my MBPro screen as the 2nd. $400 extra, which has been great for me, as I use a ton of research and multiple versions to make key decisions. It’s like having 2 eyes instead of 1.

I’ve broken my Scrivener projects out this way:
-The book in 1 project
-The media research files in 1 project
-Additional scenes that haven’t been incorporated in 1 project.

This is what makes 2 monitors helpful. I could put all that into one Scrivener project, but for various reasons it seems best to have 3 separate ones.

I worry about someone’s eyesight writing on a 12" screen. I did it for a while. You can get basic 20" LCD monitors for just about $200-250, which should be perfect for text (less so for graphics). Obviously, not good for the coffee shop.

By the way, Keith, thanks for offering a place to add suggestions. It’s enjoyable to be a part of your development process, whether any of these ideas we throw out are any good.

It’s not the size of your screen (oo-er, missus) but the size of your text that matters :slight_smile: My default prose font is 16pt Georgia, which is very easy on the eyes even on my 13" MacBook. When scripting in Courier, I simply zoom the pane to 125% magnification :slight_smile: