@kewms I think you are misunderstanding our MathType “integration.” MathType was always an external tool as well.
I think you are misunderstanding both “integration” and “external tool”. MathType was an external application that was integrated into Scrivener (so that it did not need to be an external tool). An external tool is one that requires the user to switch between applications and manually transfer data between them.
@AmberV : Adding an embedded image is one hotkey away. Editing it is another hotkey away. There would only be marginal gains in making that any more seamless
You apparently do not have any experience in actually using this Scrivener-LatexIt solution except for perhaps simple insertions of math expression. In no way do any of the solutions suggested through this post compare to the previous integration that was provided with MathType!
LaTex is a very powerful, and really not too difficult to learn, for composing mathematical documents (and formatting entire documents), but it is not practical to compose and revise equations by looking at raw LaTex markup. (I know because I have authored large mathematical documents using it.) One needs to render it continually to see how it appears and how it appears in the context of the document that you are putting it into. It is possible to do that, but it is an entirely different process than what Scrivener is, otherwise, so powerful in facilitating.
The current solutions here that don’t require one to continually imagine what the rendered LaTex will look like as one works on it, instead require iteratively switching to an external editor (whether it is LatexIt or several others which are actually much better) to compose the math, and then exporting a rendered image (which is no longer editable) so that one can then import that into Scrivener. For this you must also maintain in an organized way all the math expressions that you require for your document so that you can return to each one for revising without having to compose it all over again from scratch. (And FormulaSheet seems to be a better external editor since it helps to do some of that maintenance as well.)
The LaTexIT solution as described in the external post and using the Scrivener Template seems to be slightly better (although I have had no luck in reproducing anything as described in the posts or the Scrivener template instructions). But it still in no way compares to the Scrivener-MathType integration.
@AmberV: The point is that we would not want to stop making writing software for the years it would take to reinvent this stuff—again solely for the purpose of a marginal improvement in workflow. That just doesn’t make any sense, and we’re never going to reach the output quality of LaTeX anyway.
Now you’re just being silly! First it is not just a marginal improvement. It is a huge impact on the creative process to fiddle around with images or to read raw LaTex markup.
Second, I have architected and developed software systems and products for almost almost 40 years.
MathType was not “reinvented” when it was integrated into Scrivener. MathType just happened to provide a GUI editor with an API that allowed it to be integrated into the Scrivener application (and not with “years” of development time.) Another such equation editor would have to be employed (whether it is based on LaTex or something else) and then integrated into Scrivener in the same way – including it in the menu system and facilitating the exchange into and out of the Scrivener editor window.
Now all that being said, we all understand that a math editing feature is not the highest priority for the Scrivener application. Scrivener’s great strength and primary purpose is to assist in the process of writing novels, screenplays, and such, and that process is pretty different than what is required for writing technical documents with a lot of math content. The overlap of users wanting to do these is probably pretty small.
Nevertheless, Scrivener had a perfectly good solution when MathType was used. The loss of it is a (rare) deficiency with the Scrivener product. But not Scrivener’s fault either. Unfortunately MathType seems to have chosen to no longer support their product on Mac (probably related to the switch to 64bit from 32bit OS), and that decision is is a signal that that product is headed for obsolescence. So dropping it from one’s product is a good move. But it does mean that Scrivener will have to find an alternative product with GUI editing capabilities that that can be integrated into the application and I hope there is enough request for an integrated solution that they look into doing so.