When I was a child in a religious school, we had to go to the auditorium every Wednesday for chapel. Part of our chapel service was singing, and the lyrics for the songs were displayed on a large overhead projector. It was a rubbish projector, because everything was dreadfully blurry and unreadable. Someone, all of the kids – including myself – managed to figure out the lyrics for the various new songs.
Part way through the year, I got glasses. My first chapel after that was revelatory – they’d replaced the overhead projector at the same time, and everything was crystal clear and crisp!
“The alternative was to think it’s a beta for version 2, which never existed”.
That makes things even more confusing.
"The post title in HUGE letters says beta 3.0, which says to me at minimum, “a beta for 3 exists”.
Yes, and then the version numbers are 2.xxxxx
13000 people - so what percentage of those people mention the same topic/problem/opinion all the time?
I have been on many forums (fora?) for the past 25 years or so (some of them containing thousands of people), and I see varieties of opinions and experiences in the posts and threads on those forums, rather than one particular opinion.
In fact one of the forums have been frequenting for the past 5 years or so is dedicated to the technical use of a DAW that I use, and I seldom see people saying exactly the same thing (which sometimes surprises me).
I can see how someone might get confused if they were new to Scrivener, but advice was written in that first post:
In that first reply which you were told to proceed to, the notes included:
L&L explained things well. I’m not getting how it could be misunderstood but perhaps this thread creates an opportunity for those who did misunderstand. Other than the version nomenclature–for which a standard doesn’t exist but what L&L used is what I’ve mostly seen–what could L&L have added/subtracted to make things clearer?
Eventually, they’ll be beta x. Maybe your constructive idea(s) will be included in its presentation.
(If the cause of confusion was because you didn’t take the time to read the first two posts of the then beta thread, take it as a lesson learned. I’ve had to relearn that lesson a time or three.)
My first word processor was a typewriter and at that time a young top of the line cpu. I still am using that same old cpu while still having to manually paper in the paper to some fancy new printer And while the cpu still works (barely) these old roller feeds sometimes creak until greased.
Wandering a mile off-piste here but a few of us are showing our age!
Does anybody remember Calamus (word processor) on the Atari ST? I had to use that and K-Spread 3 for my IT GCSE exams in 1991. I failed. :mrgreen:
We had a room full of STs, a room full of BBC-Bs (hooked up to an IBM Winchester - quality school, mine!), and an Amiga 500 which was treated like the holy grail and nobody but teachers were allowed within five metres of it.
