Jaysen: as a general rule, I think that it’s always better to know, and that possessing a skill is generally better than not. So, being able to program is better than not being able to program, just as being able to read, or to cook, or to play tennis, are all good things.
I don’t think knowing how to program a computer is inherently corrupting, though of course I’m bound to be prejudiced.
PTram: Closer integration with Scrivener would be great. Of course, right now we’re separated by a moderate ocean, we use distinct programming languages, different application frameworks, and I fancy both firms have too many urgent tasks to do, and too few hands for the work. It’s amazing we work together as well as we do!
As you may soon discover, much of what proceeds from my fingertips is very tongue in cheek (which is an anatomical anomaly if you think about it). But…
From what I see around me, there is a pretty strong correlation between programming knowledge/experience and a general disassociation of “common user knowledge” limits. Otherwise all UI and all menu systems would be fabulous. I think ptram’s point, and the source of my jibe at folks like me, is that we programmer/systems/nerd types really don’t always see things like the average person. Hence the general stereotypes about us. Unless you want to look at things in our convoluted and overly complicated manner, then not having our mind isn’t so bad.
There might be something worth thinking about in there somewhere.
Just picking up some comments earlier in this thread; I have never really understood the complaints about Tinderbox’s supposed ‘ugliness’. Even at their default settings, the maps are really quite good to look at. Plus, you can beautify them in many different ways.
As for the UI, I just don’t see what the issue is. The small toolbar isn’t exactly gorgeous, but after all, its just a toolbar! Does anyone care that much? What it needs to do, it does well - for instance, I cannot see how the linking button and associated parking bays could be any better implemented.
There are lots of other examples of well thought out UI, some of them more recent additions; the typeahead search, inline editing, the ability to see into and manipulate containers from the level above, and so on.
Personally, I have no problem with the approach eastgate has adopted with the UI. I would much rather have a simple but (in my opinion) well implemented UI than a fake spiral bound notebook splashed across my laptop screen. I have to use Tinderbox at work, sometimes sat in a Court room, and need to be taken seriously.
As for price, I sometimes wonder whether the complaints are more about context; anything that has a price attached represents poor value if you buy it and don’t use it. I certainly wouldn’t recommend buying Tinderbox if you do not have a clear idea of what you might need it for. I am using Tinderbox to help me manage a legal dispute worth £15m. For me, in that context, the price of the licence represents something of a bargain.
Just a little update, after my first post three weeks ago. I bought Twig at the intro price a few days ago; it’s worth it to me because I use it constantly. In fact, my primary Twig file has become my favorite “junk drawer” – I toss ideas into it, as they occur to me.
I create new Twig files as I need them, for new projects I’m working on, and for websites I’m updating.
What I like:
Its speed
Not having to think – I can just drop material into it, knowing I’ll find it again later
Opening the file in TB anytime, then opening it in Twig again
SimpleNote integration – very useful for my iPad notes.