scrivener on an ultraportable (CULV)

Scrivener
1

Hello,

I really don’t want to provoke problems for anyone here nor stir up hostile responses (I know what Apple’s EULA says for example–to forestall one common response). I’m just after information. In brief, has anyone here tried running scrivener on an emulated osx on a proper ultraportable 12" screen–one of the one’s with a decent 1366x768 or bigger resolution?

This would seem to be doable in theory by running osx86 in a virtual machine on a windows or linux machine. And scrivener would seem to be an application that might work fine despite the limitations of osx86, as one isn’t looking for superb graphics or video handling (things that I understand might not work well with osx86). Has anyone tried it, and if they have could they say how well or badly it works? (I received the impression from earlier threads that the moderators would prefer if you don’t explain how to do it, nor link to such; so please don’t.)

I’ve searched the forums for this and found some tangential topics about scrivener on netbooks, that wandered off into arguments about usability of small screens and keyboards, the probability of Apple producing a netbook, and the legality or otherwise of osx86. I’ve also looked for threads on emulators and virtual machines. There seems to be a strong demand for a portable writing machine among a subsection of users (whose needs I guess overlap with mine) and another subsection of users who can’t understand why Apple’s current offerings don’t meet the needs of the first group. So far as I can see a small minority of the second group are actively hostile for some reason.

To explain, very briefly, why all this interests me:
I work in several different places and find none of the current Apple lineup cater for my needs with regards to a small and light computer with a decent sized screen and keyboard and battery life. I want an 11" or 12" screen with a decent resolution and a reasonable keyboard for working on the move, and that can be plugged into a larger screen and keyboard when I am at home or at my office. In other words the MacBook Air is not what I want (too large). I want OSX for Scrivener and the ease of typing foreign languages and non-western scripts (in unicode). (For all my other software needs I think I prefer cross-platform solutions that don’t tie me to a particular manufacturer–that said, if the b***ers would just bring out an apple-branded ultraportable equivalent to those now coming available for windows I’d probably be the very first to buy one.)

If you think Apple will be bringing one of these out soon, perhaps to replace the MB Air, I’d be interested to hear about it. But at present the impression I have is that Apple is more interested in selling ipods/phones/pads and couldn’t care less about my requirements.

Thanks in advance for your answers.
Ian

2

On running OS X on non-Apple hardware: I might be mistaken, but I don’t think anybody actually runs OS X as a virtual machine under Windows or Linux. Rather, the usual solution is like a mirror of Apple’s BootCamp solution for Windows: you actually install OS X on a bootable partition of such a device, or instead of Windows or Linux altogether. Like Apple has done with BootCamp, the Hackintosh community have come up with bootloaders and driver hacks to make the operating system work with a limited range of hardware. There’s thus a limited range of machines that people recommend for OS X – they usually have a basic hardware compatibility with Apple’s machines (e.g. the Dell Mini 9 or 10v, which have the same graphics card as the Mac Mini), or at least have enough similarity and popularity that people will be willing to create/tweak drivers for them. There are a few things that don’t work perfectly, even with a lot of very compatible machines; for example, Safe Sleep doesn’t work on anything except the MSI Wind, I hear. But generally, the only thing that makes me realise I’m not using a Mac when I’m using my Hackintosh netbook is the dodgy hardware design, build quality and screen size.

On specifically running Scrivener on ultraportables: I run Scrivener on a 1024x600 netbook, and the only problem I have is that the Preferences window is too tall for the screen. I think a 1024x768 iBook was Scrivener’s original target machine during development, so I don’t foresee any problems.

3

What is there about royalties and copyrights that you hackers don’t understand?
It’s laughable the way you go on about “my requirements,” as though they were infinitely superior to the hardware and software that the rest of us BUY and support as a community.

My advice: buy a 13-inch MacBook Pro and learn to carry its weight around.
Otherwise, I hope you get caught or else profoundly mess up the piece of ordure that you do buy.

I gather you have never published a book. If you had, you would not be so cavalier about ripping off other people’s talents, just to suit your own selfish needs. Sorry, not a bit of sympathy here. Go away.

4

That`s tellin``em, Tiger!
images-1.jpeg

5

Jebni, thanks for your informative response. Good to hear that you do use Scrivener on a smaller form factor and that it works for you. I believe (possibly wrongly) that VMs may not work very well on atom processors, or perhaps they just work very slowly. Theoretically, I think they should work on some of the newer CULV processors, but I’m not aware of anyone using them on this relatively new hardware. Hence my question.

Druid, thanks for your advice. I already have a larger Apple portable and a desktop and have also purchased Apple’s latest OS. I am looking for a smaller machine, which regrettably cannot be Apple as they do not make such a machine. When they do, I’ll likely buy it. You are free to laugh at my requirements; for my part I find the concept of buying things that don’t meet one’s needs in order to ‘support’ a company with 40 billion dollars in the bank (and who have made and continue to make plenty of money from me) strange. :wink:

Intellectual property is a fascinating invention and a very interesting and complex legal and moral area. I don’t want to discuss it here. (Try this for a brief history of the US IP laws by a Harvard professor.) However, I doubt that anyone who claims it is clear cut and seeks to trivialize the rights and wrongs, either in law or ethics, has much of an understanding of it.

I’d also suggest that people providing quality and value will never have a serious problem selling their product–I trust you don’t. And I don’t think Apple do … so I find your rudeness and aggression towards strangers odd. (And as for publications you may ‘gather’ what you will.)
Best regards,
Ian :slight_smile:

6

Druid, I agree that these practices aren’t um, totally legal, but while the Hackintosh netbook crowd do indeed break OS X’s software EULA (and various aspects of software EULAs have been challenged in numerous countries, I understand), there is a clear understanding in the “Hackintosh”-centric forums I’ve visited that everyone should pay for an original copy of OS X, in much the same way that users of BootCamp or VMware Fusion on the Mac buy copies of Windows. This isn’t a wink-wink-nudge-nudge thing – people who fail to do are berated as pirates.

You might disagree with “Hackintoshing”, but the issue has little to do with royalties and copyright per se. Most people who install OS X on a netbook are not depriving Apple of royalties from the software, because they bought it, and are not breaking any copyright laws, because they’re not redistributing it. They’re simply breaking an agreement to abstain from installing the software on non-Apple-badged machines, which is not a sacred principle, if you ask me. I absolutely do understand why Apple has a unified approach to hardware and software, but really, I don’t think it should be a sin for a determined hobbyist to play with that distinction, with material they purchased.

Perhaps there’s a case to be made that Apple’s hardware sales subsidise their software development, but really, Hackintoshing is a minority, specialist endeavour that bends the rules, and I think the act of installing a piece of software you bought on a piece of hardware that Apple have declared off-limits has no real bearing on Apple’s real market and their billions in cash reserves. Hackintoshing takes effort. It relies on an incredible amount of volunteer ingenuity, which is really an end in itself, rather than an attempt to rip someone off. It doesn’t always work 100%. There is no real “market” in it. I run OS X on a netbook, and purchased my copy of Snow Leopard. I also have five Macs in my house. On the other hand, others can’t afford a Mac, and thus wouldn’t have bought one anyway, and are at least buying something from Apple (the OS). Sure, the EULA has been broken, but nobody’s selling Apple’s intellectual property for their own profit – I don’t really think there’s that much cause for alarm here.

In my mind, to blow up about something like this is akin to going after people who break DVD encryption so they can back up their personal DVDs, which they own, onto a personal hard drive, all while there are outfits out there making large profits from retailing pirated DVDs.

And while I know that saying “all the cool kids are doing it” is hardly a good excuse for breaking the EULA, quite a few prominent and well-loved people in the Mac community, such as Panic’s Steven Frank, MacWorld’s Rob Griffiths and the Chicago Sun-Times’ Andy Ihnatko (a great booster of Scrivener, BTW) have all broken the EULA and Hackintoshed the odd netbook, because these are people who love to tinker. I’d love to see you tell Frank that he doesn’t support the community, or tell Ihnatko to “go away” :slight_smile: …

7

With my sensible hat on (and granted, its a tight and uncomfortable fit), as Ian and Jeb have pointed out, droo: If youve bought the OS, and you want to install it on your microwave or toaster, what earthly right have Apple got (realistically), to tell you, 'You cant'. Lamborghini, dont tell me on which days I`m allowed to drive my car. :wink:
Take care
Vic

8

Just to add another note of “solidarity” with the so-called Hackintosh: the EULA is far from an air-tight legal statement (that is, it is airtight from Apple’s perspective, as it must be, but not from the perspective of the Law-as-such). Let’s even leave aside the extra-legal question of Apple’s extraordinary debts to the open-source community (much more a community than the Apple “community” of consumers). In any case, this peculiar abstract loyalty to an enormous multinational corporation is alarming. (And yet, we Apple-users from the earlier days also have yet to receive our commissions for all the converts). And again a question not only beyond ethics, but also beyond the requirements of the law. (That is the Law that is not Apple’s law).

Hope it works out… Please keep us posted.

9

(All this debate on the evils of Hackintoshing aside, I think Keith should feel free to delete this thread if he feels weird hosting a forum where people are talking about breaking Apple’s EULA in order to use Scrivener on unsupported hardware. It does place him in a weird position as a paid up ADC developer. And the Scrivener forum is hardly the best place to find out about Hackintoshing, anyway.)

10

I would guess KB would only delete this series as a polite person (he is very polite) and not as an ADC dev. As an ADC developer, Apple owes him 15% on the many machines he has sold for them. The number of users that switch or that stay with Apple (my case) because of Scrivener really should earn Keith some extra wool. He deserves it too. Also, his fora are true places of exchange. And for this he should likewise be commended. (He is also right-on about Apple’s troubling move towards closed, consumption devices… See his blog post on the Pad…)

s.

11

Thanks, vic-k, jebni and samuelas, for the sanity.

I too would hope this thread does not turn into something advocating hackintosh. And nor should this be the place to describe how to run osx86. My personal feeling is that it is reasonable to inquire whether it is possible to run scrivener on one of the new ultraportables here, without necessarily advocating anyone does it. And those who have done any investigation will know that it is not particularly easy to get working and the results do not usually measure up to running it on genuine Apple hardware. I think only the really hardcore ‘hackers’ would even consider it, if Apple had a machine in their lineup that catered for this ultraportable segment–and, as jebni says, those hackers are probably motivated more by a spirit of curiosity than anything else.

But (as I attempted to say right at the start of the thread) I don’t want to offend anyone and certainly not KB, for whom (like everyone here, I guess) I have a very high regard.

samuelas, I agree with your sentiments in both posts–& indeed with KB’s blog post. The community around these forums and this product is indeed impressive.

Thanks again.
Ian

12

Scrivener For Mice

13

We are saved!

14

What have you done?

sigh

15

Very nice, Amber! :slight_smile: Is that a remote desktop perchance?
Scrivener on an ultralight with ARM processor (and keyboard) for the long battery life. Now there’s a thought. :wink:
All the best,
Ian

16

Hmm.

I’m going to support droo on this (though not necessarily his ways of expressing his views).

Those of us who write for a living, or aspire to do so, depend on the laws that protect intellectual property. If within the next generation those laws “are honoured more in the breach than the observance” and fall by the wayside, as they threaten to do, then our activities won’t survive (and, of course, readers will lose out too). (Even today, who’d write, say, a textbook? I have a friend who’s doing so right now, and, boy, is it not financially rewarding, way below minimum-wage level if you calculate the rate per hour, partly thanks to the way student photocopying has reduced what such books can expect to earn.)

In a law-governed society you can’t pick and choose which of those laws you obey — well of course you can, but then don’t complain if others pick and choose whether they obey the laws that protect you and what you do. Even if those same laws are also sheltering the Big Bad Apple, or the protections are “quite hard to hack”, or “can only be broken by the few with expert knowledge.” Do you mount those same arguments if, say Apple’s profits take a dive, or you haven’t bought a couple of Apple products already, or hackintoshing gets a lot easier and more popular?

And then, if I happen to have a big and wealthy publisher, do you apply those same seductive but damaging arguments to my intellectual property too?

My 1p (reduced from 2p by copyright abuse…)
H

Edit: I can’t get your Harvard link to work, idc.

17

Hugh,
Thanks for your comments, and particularly for pointing out the problem with the link. Here it is without my trying to be clever with the bulletin board code:
cyber.law.harvard.edu/property99/history.html
Sorry about that. It’s an interesting article.

Although, I find IP fascinating and would be delighted to debate it over a pint in the pub sometime–or even on a different thread–I’d rather not do so here, as it tends to take the thread way off topic (which was the question of can this be done). If you’d like to open a thread debating the pros and cons of IP, I’ll try and post my views.

Thanks again for your contribution and the way you put it. :slight_smile:
Ian

(I’ve corrected the original link as well, which should now work.)

On second thoughts, maybe its rude of me not to try and answer your questions briefly, even at risk to the thread topic–and we can open a thread elsewhere if we want to explore the topic more thoroughly. So …

I happen to be like your friend, writing financially unrewarding stuff (but personally very rewarding–money ain’t everything). Historically, great literature was written even before the late medieval or early modern invention of intellectual property. Homer didn’t complain about pirates and nor did Shakespeare refuse to produce plays because others might steal them and put them on. So I don’t buy the argument that IP is essential for creative writers or great literature for two reasons: both history and my own and others’ examples prove that human beings will produce creative stuff (great stuff) without the need for a monopoly or financial reward of any sort. If you want to do it badly enough you’ll find another way to earn your bread whilst doing it.

Secondly the monopoly that is granted by society (or originally by the king) for the purpose of rewarding creators for their creativity and for the benefits they bring to society was for a relatively short period of time. It was never costless. The cost is and was borne by those who pay higher prices than they otherwise would for a period of time until the monopoly expires. After that we all get to enjoy cultural goods (in the case of writers) as part of our common culture. (Provided that is that the excess profits made on that monopoly is not diverted into paying legislators to extend the monopoly indefinitely against the interests of society–I refer you to William Fisher’s history I linked to.) The issue then is what is the correct length of time for the reward, and what constitutes a reasonable balance between creator’s rights and consumer’s rights.

There is a second very important set of exceptions to the creator’s monopoly, which is the area of ‘fair use’. In my opinion, some creators and many EULA’s make a great (and unreasonable) effort to stifle that latter area.

Lastly, a law-governed society is all about debate, and discussion of the correct interpretation of the law. That is what lawyers, legislators and judges (and juries) do. Some things are relatively easy to agree on. But IP does not (in my opinion–and that of many eminent lawyers) fall into that category. It is law that is still being made. So there is no black and white in this case. Only fuzzy shades of grey that can be brought into focus by discussion and interpretation.

That is not sophistry or excuses for wrong-doing. Nor is it an argument against IP or against creator’s rights. It is an argument for investigating the issues for oneself and making up one’s own mind about where the boundaries should be between creator’s rights and benefits to society as a whole. I hope you will understand from the above that personally I am in favour of creator’s rights. I simply don’t believe they should be untrammelled. And personally, and as a creator myself, I think that is a more altruistic position than the idea that some creators put forward that their rights should take precedence over the rest of society’s ‘rights’.

18

Just to add one final thing, Hugh, and to try and bring my above arguments back to the points you were making.

Of course no one should be trying to rob others on the basis of their being rich. We agree on this. But nor–of course–should the wealthy and powerful be trying to rob the less powerful (and often less able) sections of society of their rights. Which is what much of the current attempts to extend IP (or to muddy the legal waters by conflating IP with real property) are really about. (Corporate profits if you like at the expense of the consumer.)

As for the matter of applying arguments to your wealthy publisher, my wife is a publisher and they don’t tend to be that wealthy. (I wish they were! :smiley:) But in any case, the argument being mounted there is that hackintoshing actually has no negative impact on Apple’s profits and if anything raises the numbers of people using Apple (because so many people, having tried OSX on their windows PC then go on to buy an Apple in order to get the full experience; I think Apple knows this as they have made little effort to prevent hackintoshing, nor to enforce their EULA except against people like Psystar who were trying to undercut Apple’s sales). So I don’t really think those arguments are applicable to your writing or your publisher. I suppose one could take your friend’s situation and extend the analogy by arguing that the students who photocopy his text books may one day buy the textbook if they like his work enough, rather than putting up with the inferior xeroxes. I do not know enough about his textbooks to comment.

I’m not sure we necessarily disagree on that much. You and I are simply looking at the problem through different ends of the telescope. From the point of view of a creator who would like to be able to make a living (or even a good living) through one’s creativity (a viewpoint I’m personally familiar with), the fair use exceptions enshrined in IP law are a nuisance. But from society’s point of view (the utilitarian point of view), it is hard to see why creators should have any rights at all, if they thereby encroach too much on the rights of everyone else, i.e. if they try and do away with fair use exceptions or to lengthen the monopoly beyond what is reasonable (especially by simply purchasing legislators).

And of course there is my personal view as a creator, which is why on earth would I want to try and stop others accessing my ideas? I’m writing for an audience and I want them to have access to my writing. If a student is so poor that he would rather spend his time photocopying my work than purchasing it in a nice beautifully presented and reasonably priced edition, then I would rather he has it that way than that he is thrown into jail or denied access to my ideas all together. (My wife as a publisher might disagree though as her empoyer won’t be trousering cash for the beautifully presented edition they haven’t sold.) Of course if vast numbers of people are photocopying my work then I have to look at the product I’m offering and say, have I overpriced it, that people are going to such lengths to access it? Either way, I am pleased to have produced something people want.

Oh dear. Now I’m poisoning the thread myself with too much argument.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion, apologies for my wordiness (if I’d had more time I’d have made it shorter :wink: ) and all the best.
Ian

19

idc, thanks for your reply.

To respond briefly (I promise), yes I agree with much of what you’ve written. Of course a balance needs to be struck and to be agreed between the rights of the creator and the rights of the consumer. Of course the current balance is expressed in countless ways within the current intellectual property laws. Of course that balance does include and conceal, and has always, included and concealed all sorts of unfairnesses, both petty and pernicious — on both sides of the equation. And of course some concessions to the consumer side by the creator side may end up benefiting the creator; free tasters can be an effective form of marketing in certain circumstances. But all that’s true of many kinds of markets for many kinds of goods and services; one can believe that a lot of it is wrong and unfair and even wicked and campaign for, say, law changes that attempt to correct the worst abuses of monopoly or oligopoly, without believing one has a right to break or shave the law as it stands.

Yes, there are differences between intellectual property and physical property both in theory and in practice. But at a personal level there are also plenty of similarities. I do writing for money. I’m not quite “What other kind is there?” But when sweating away on the latest draft at 2 a.m. I like to feel that I and my dependants will benefit — as well of course as my bequeathing a legacy of cultural goods to the world (ho hum…) . When I write I put in the same sort of effort I would if I were, for example, making a chair or laying a floor.

Take that chair or that writing from me without paying a price that reflects my effort and I’d feel as I would if you’d stolen it from me. I don’t, I’m afraid, merely feel happy that I’m donating to the cultural commons.

All this might not matter much, but we may be at a key moment in the history of writing for money. Not only is the technology changing rapidly (of course), but also possibly the attitudes of consumers, many of whom appear increasingly to feel that they do have a right to free or at least very inexpensive creative goods. I know that’s not what you’re arguing for, but nonetheless that may be where your arguments lead.

No one’s mentioned music yet. Perhaps the changes music has experienced are for the better overall, and probably they were irresistible. But in my career in various kinds of entertainment I’ve seen some of the downsides where pirated material has destroyed projects and livelihoods.

In book-writing, I don’t even see the opportunities for partial regeneration that music’s found in performance and merchandising. Maybe something will turn up. But in the meantime I think that it won’t help us if people who otherwise may need intellectual property protection in some form or another appear to be enthusiastic about compromising Apple’s EULA.

H

20

Here is a solution to the original question, with politics aside.
I am working from a Dell Mini, and there are screen resolution adjustments available, and they are discussed in this forum: http://www.mydellmini.com/forum/faqs-how-tos/2099-virtually-increase-your-dell-mini-screen-resolution.html

The best ones are Automator scripts, but even those don’t work with Scrivener. The full preference window is viewable, but the program closes when attempting to reset preferences while the resolution is changed.

Here is my solution: Assuming that your Hackintosh is not your primary mac, and you have Scrivener installed on both, just copy the Scrivener preferences files from your main Mac to your Hack-Mac. The best way to transfer it is through DropBox. No writer should be without it. It will change your life. You transfer files right from finder. It is like using a flash drive without the risk of losing it. Keep your main Scrivener files on it and they will automatically sync when you use multiple Macs. It is free and indispensable. 2 GB storage and you get 250 MB free if you sign up through a referral. Here is a referral link: https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTEwNDQ3MTU5. Seriously, it will change the way you work.

Back to the solution: Your Scrivener preferences are in your home directory, library, preferences:

com.literatureandlatte.scrivener.LSSharedFileList.plist
com.literatureandlatte.scrivener.plist

copy both to your desktop, just in case something blows up.

replace them with the ones from your main Mac, with the desired preferences (I like to type in Courier 12, like my 1934 Underwood) and it’s done!

Now back to the political ranting. I agree with the poster who said I can install my paid version of Snow Leopard on a toaster if I want to. I was waiting for the iPad, but have you attempted to type with it? It’s a nice toy, but not for serious writing. I was in need of a MacBook smaller than 13" and the Dell Mini 10V is the answer. OSX installs effortlessly with a slight adjustment to the boot flash drive.

Gook luck and let the anti-hack posts continue! (while I get back to my novel)