I’m quite enjoying using Scrivener, and I’ll try to be the first about to license 1.01. Grin.
There are many things I’ve not really examined completely (such as waiting until 1.01 to figure out how I might use notes….) Yet there is one bit that I’m having a hard time accepting with any sort of true grace.
Maybe it’s from too many years as a paranoid about saving files. I built my first computer from boards, including a memory expansion block that required 132 chips (each foot handwired) making up a whopping 8K.
But why does my need to do saves at random moments require it to be Forced? I know Scrivener is saving along in the background, ya, no problem. But why isn’t my save just a Save? Scrivener can save, and I can save, and we really don’t need that Force bit. It remains Command-S, yes, not Command-F?
It’s force save BECAUSE Scrivener is automatically saving. If you don’t want to wait for it to save on its own, you can force a save right then. But if it were just labelled ‘save’, it would be less clear that Scrivener will do it anyway.
The whole “force save” thing was discussed earlier here.
I find the term “force save” a bit weird too, but hey, nobody dies. It freaked me out the first time I used the software though, as I automatically looked for “save” and thought it wasn’t there. I just put it down to being a “mac thing”. I’m used to “mac things” as I’ve only been using them for a very short time.
Exactly. Apple’s HIG says “Save (Command-S)” is considered a standard item under the File menu. There are several other commands that can be added to the list, but they do not replace the standard Save command.
I did read the posts from the link you provided, with the note that Scrivener says Force because auto-save programs don’t usually allow for any save. Then I hunted around on my Mac for programs that can be set to auto-save every X minutes. Here that appears to be Mellel and Inspiration. Both programs feature the standard Save command between auto saves.
I don’t exactly freak out at Force Save, and I agree that I’ve not heard of anyone dying because of HIG violations. Still, it seems as though one of the reasons we have the lovely Mac platform on which to write is because programs adhere to the guidelines that prevent user confusion. Force Save may, in fact, make it clearer in some way that Scrivener is auto-saving, though I don’t see that myself. Still, the File Menu isn’t there to explain additional functions of the program. That’s the Help Menu.
The Force in Force Save took me aback initially as well. But after a moment, I realized it was simply analogous to Save in most other apps, and I continued merrily on my way. I hardly ever use cmd-S in Scriv anyway. Still, substituting the word Manual for Force might relieve some apprehensiveness for tyros.
It amazes me how many people quote the HIG when Apple are so clearly in violation of them with all of their i-Apps and pro-Apps. Save does not have to be under the File menu. Some auto-saving apps have no Save command at all. “Force Save” really stresses the purpose of this.
But if we’re just down to semantics, then I guess I can rest easy that I’ve done a good job with the app.
If it bothers you too much, you can use Interface Builder to rename it yourself, of course.
Ooo… sorry, I’m new here, and didn’t recognize tender toes. I didn’t intend to (or actually) quote Apple’s HIG. I haven’t even seen the thing in many years, but Save was always, to my memory, one of the primary bits of the File Menu.
Many years ago I was testing some publishing software by Linotype, still only in German and myself only English. I quite loved the fact that I could figure out some of it, that Glensplick was followed by Glensplick Us… and I knew my way around a tiny bit. (Re: Glensplick, I’m still only English.)
Again, my apologies, but how could any discussion of the specific words used in a menu be about much more than semantics? If even the few folks who’ve made a note in this thread mentioning that Force Save was confusing to them, that’s semantics, right?
In my initial post in this thread, I stated twice that Scrivener is a lovely program to work within, and that I was enjoying using it. I hadn’t quite realized that questioning a point was saying otherwise.
The other notes above seemed actual replies to my question. This last line, though, seems simply tacky and churlish. Why bother to put up a forum area labelled “Feedback” and, when someone offers what is meant as simple discussion of program, not your person or reason for being, say, “Hey, if you don’t like it, do it yourself!”
You clearly misinterpret me - my tone was not meant to be churlish at all. I welcome all feedback, but I don’t implement every single suggestion. I was trying to explain to you why I think “Force Save” makes sense; I was also explaining to you that the HIG are no longer consistent (most developers are hoping some consistency will return with Leopard), but Scrivener abides by the HIG as much as possible; I was also giving you a very real way of fixing this if it genuinely does bother you - other users have used Interface Builder to customise apps. I always use IB to switch off the metallic look of Safari, for instance, because that is a pet-hate of mine.
Looks like it’s not only my toes that are tender.
Incidentally, I use smileys because I don’t want my words to be considered anything but in good humour.
As you point out, this discussion has come up before, and I have given my reasons before. Not everyone will agree, of course, but I hold by my decision.
Whoaaa… perhaps you’ll be churlish enough (grin) to clarify where I threw an insult at Keith? To my understanding, Feedback is discussing or commenting upon specific points. I honestly intended every comment I had made to be exactly that, comments upon a part of the user interface, not about the interface with the programmer. Answers like, “If you don’t like it…” don’t appear to me to be responding to the point.
(Well, I do know of one example of feedback that fits that approach. An old man who managed a large lot of horse stables once took me around to the front of the row, each stall door having a door which lowered to allow one to put grain in a little bin. “Here’s where you put your feed.” He then took me to the other side, pointed down, and said, “Here’s where you get your feed back.”)
Laughing… ya, maybe. Still, among the folks who have responded, most have said it seemed odd to them until they figured out that Force Save was really just Save, and then things were fine.
I think the humans who came up with the Mac HIG were really just trying to cut out the middle step of translation.
Of course, it’s Keith’s program, and if he wants to say Write the Current Stack Operands to Disc in Their Current State rather than Save, that’s his choice. Mainly, I’ve been using Scrivener to write for a bit over a week, it seems quite nice for that, and really, as long as I just hit Command S, I don’t even have to see the menu.
I’m yet somewhat confused about, well, Apple ignores the HIG sometimes, so it’s a good thing to do, but they shouldn’t, and developers hope that things get better, but in the meantime, they use Apple as a reason to ignore the HIG.
That said, if the world made sense and things were always done in a logical manner, there probably wouldn’t be very much to write about, eh?
Now that we’re all grinning like idiots again.
I have no problem with your response. Welcome: I’m more than happy to be demoted to the position of second most insolent member of this forum. Trust me it’s not much of a distinction - we’re a pretty tame lot round here. It’s like being the “Enforcer” on a croquet team.
It is a common way to vent frustration, that is for sure, but I think it goes a bit deeper than that. The fact is, that ‘G’ is an important part of the equation. There are occasions when the guidelines are not applicable, and a more elegant or informative solution can be used without them. I honestly do not have a problem with Apple’s pro products, even though they do have drastically different behaviour from their consumer products. If Aperture or Final Cut really followed HIG to the letter, they would be steaming piles of excrement with fancy banners proclaiming their superiority.
But this is also true outside of the professional arena. There are some wonderfully simple applications that break the rules, and are quite elegant about it. Does “Force Save” fall within that envelope? I really have no opinion on the matter. The name has never bothered me – probably because I never actually think to use it. I pause enough for auto-save to always have my back. So, I don’t know. What I do know is that there are plenty of auto-save applications out there that do not even have a save menu entry enabled.
Why does Apple needlessly break them? My opinion is pretty simple: HIG is an extremely Woz kind of thing; not at all a Jobs kind of thing.
(Sighs.) This is not what I am doing, not at all. But it is a valid point that Apple don’t stick to them. Why not? Because OS X is evolving. As for Force Save: Look, it makes sense. I have listened to other views on this topic, weighed them up, and ultimately I disagree. I have to go with what I think is right. I value feedback, and if you familiarise yourself with the forum’s archives, given your tone I think you will be surprised at just how much of Scrivener’s development has been pushed forward by user feedback and suggestions. The whole order of the menus was rearranged very carefully to fit in more with the HIG because of user suggestions. The way the corkboard is automatically selected when you select a folder - user suggestion. The way multiple cards are displayed when you select multiple items in the binder - user suggestion (Eiron’s, in fact, and Amber’s too, I think). Underline in header view to indicate current document - user suggestion. Well, I won’t go on, because I would be here for days. Suffice to say that I do value suggestions and feedback, and the historical development of the program backs this statement up, and I may get quite narked if anyone suggests otherwise. That said, Scrivener is not written by committee. I seriously consider all feedback, and then I make a decision. Often, that decision will be “no”. In this case, “Force Save” makes complete sense. Scrivener auto-saves for you whenever changes have been made and the program has been inactive for two seconds (or when it is closed). In such cases, many programs do not have a Save feature at all. So in Scrivener, you are “forcing” a save.
Right, “Write the Current Stack Operands to Disc in Their Current State” it is. Just to please you.
Oh, you know what? Sod it. I’ll just rename “Force Save” to “Save”. This is too many words over something so trivial. I’ll do it. Fine.
You realize that if you do this, some wanker will just ask “If there’s a Save command, why can’t I disable automatic saves?” – just wait. You heard it here first.
So if the Cava’s making the decisions tonight why not throw up your hands and give in to a really useful suggestion like hmm, i don’t know…
Don’t worry, Keith. People love and value both Scrivener and You; Forced Save, big nose and all. Have a drink.
As a relative newcomer to Scrivener and L&L let me just say I cannot see what all the fuss is about here. So it’s called Force Save. So what? It’s still invoked with a Cmd-S. KB was trying to be clearer. I don’t get the consternation.