I expect that the next version of Scrivener for Mac will adopt the new conventions of Liquid Glass. I’m sorry to be sometimes very vocal about how much I despise it, but when thinking about it I’m always caught by a less than mild sense of desperation. Like, being out of the times, in a world that I can’t adapt to.
Scrivener 3 seems to be already perfectly integrated with the modern versions of the Mac OS, with only cosmetic differences (that might be a blessing…). This should mean that it will likely work flawlessly with the OSs of the next few years, even if with a growing mismatch from the surrounding environment. If there is something that we can appreciate in the current version, and it will disappear in Scrivener 4, we will probably still be able to use by launching the older version.
I would therefore kindly ask that Scrivener 4 can live in parallel with version 3. I hope installing the new version will not prevent the older to work.
Scrivener’s aesthetic is totally fine, and no changes need to be made just for change’s sake. Of course, when updating the code to use more of Apple’s recommended frameworks, some aesthetic changes will automatically happen.
What I’m looking forward to in a future version are functional refinements. I think “The New App” will be a playground for testing some of these approaches.
It’s still possible to officially download versions of Scrivener 1 and 2, so my guess is that the same will be true for version 3, even if Scrivener 4 comes out.
Yeah, the only reason you cannot use the older versions (on a Mac) is not our fault or by any choice we made, it’s because Apple dropped backward compatibility for older software some years ago. It still works fine on macOS 10.14 or less though[1]—I just wouldn’t let it go online at this point as it’s probably very vulnerable.
On Windows/Linux, you can still run the v1 alongside v3 if you want (makes slightly more sense on Linux, where the native version is v1).
Software is software, you install it or you don’t, nobody can tell you otherwise. Now if you use rentalware or “web apps”, well… then you’re stuck with whatever everyone else tells you to do.
Fine in my experience, I should say. I could launch v1 on that system and it largely works, as well as v2, but neither of those versions were tested on anything past 10.11. ↩︎
No, probably not. They usually take their time to release a new software, and rewriting Scrivener should be a very long work.
This should be reassuring for me. After the 26 disaster, I’m seeing all the software I was thinking to use disappearing. The iPad is now a lost cause for me, with its parody of desktop computers. With no sign it will improve on the concept of clean, focused, single-task device. And the Mac has been dangerously moved into murky waters, from which I can only hope not to be submerged.
So, I must rethink my small world, and Scrivener is likely to be its center. I must consider it as a lifeboat in this disaster. I must be sure to be able to rely on it.
I get it. But sooner or later, every software-version you love gets unsupported (by the OS or even lack of certain hardware). And then you put it in a VM running on a reasonably secure host. It’s not as bad as it sounds these days, with near-native performance. The older the software, the better.
Yes there are aspects that need improvement, but it’s a solid OS and every app I’ve tried works fine with it.
As for Scrivener 3 / 4. As noted by the L&L staff on here, it’s always been possible to run multiple versions of Scrivener (subject to OS constraints), so it’s a non-issue.
I look forward to whatever improvements Keith and co. provide if/when a version 4 is released.
I haven’t seen any support tickets for Scrivener 1 lately, but we definitely still have Scrivener 2 users, nearly nine years after Scrivener 3 was released. Scrivener 2 is robust enough that we mostly only hear from them when they upgrade their computers and have to move to Scrivener 3.
Vista’s UI was not the problem[1], it just became unintentionally kind of very long beta period leading to Windows 7; which was pretty popular, almost identical interface.
There’s nothing “hysterical” about customers voicing their points of criticism. What else are they supposed to do? Just suck it up and be quiet in the corner?
well, if you don’t count all the XP machines having a hard time meeting the new system requirements ↩︎
My comment was aimed at those who present it as the end of the world as we know it (tongue in cheek)
The issues with Vista - hardware demands, bloated mess, poorly executed. I could go on. You could say that the move to Win 7 was them finally getting the worst bugs out and realizing they had to give it another name because the Vista name by then was toxic.
Many of us spend a lot of time “in” our computer environments. If someone comes along and completely redecorates these highly personal spaces without consulting us it can be a bit jarring to say the least.
