Reasons for choosing old version of Scrivener ?

I knew about Scrivener a bit and have discovered only recently it was possible to have it on my Debian (as I work only under Linux). And I had no trouble installing it with the .deb package.
I was just wondering why it is an old version of Scrivener, and not the latest. So many nice features in Scrivener 2 that I would be more than happy to use them, paying a fee like everybody else on Windows and Mac of course.

The Linux version is just a bit behind the features of the Windows version, which is still Scrivener 1. Scrivener 2 is only available on the Mac. Basically, you get the same features as the Windows version (except for PDF support) for free. Saddly, free also means no support, which means if you run into trouble you’re in your own. And it also means that you have to deal with some annoying Linux only bugs (I’m looking at you, blank project bug).

I am a happy user of Scrivener 2 for Mac, but I also use the Linux version quite a lot, since any project can be opened in any version of Scrivener. The only feature I really miss is custom metadata, but YMMV.

In fact I was lurking around Compile options, which are very appealing to me.
I am very happy already to be able to use Scrivener, and for free. But I don’t mind giving money to working people, and would be ready to pay like other users, especially as this software is really the one I was looking for. I hope this beta version will lead to an official one, with more features… :smiley:

Actually if you want to nitpick, we’re a bit ahead of the Windows one now, version-wise. It’s more like the Windows version is not-quite the same as the current Mac one, but it’s got way more features than the first series (for Mac) did.

Thssssp! We’ve got Sci Fi! :stuck_out_tongue: