Where to next for Scriv?

Scrivener
1

A longish post here, but I write this as a rusted-on Scriv user and I think, like everybody on this forum, we want to see it thrive. Created by writers, for writers, Scriv does wonders for me: fiction & non-fiction books, my newspaper column and various magazines.
I won’t hesitate to pay for the next major upgrade, but the question goes beyond the features. How does a product like this remain commercially viable? Often the biggest competitor to a product is the previous version, so what comes next? I’ve been using MS Word since 1942 and, for my money, we hit peak wordprocessor around version 2. Adobe has earned a lot of flack over its licensing model. It gives Adobe an income stream, but people really don’t like it. Should Sciv do the same?

Features
I’d be wary of feature-bloat. As a former software developer, I know that typically only about 70% of features get used. Every feature adds complexity for users as well as development & maintenance costs. To me, Scriv already does nearly everything I could want. You’ll have your own ideas, but here’s my thoughts.

Synchronised projects
I suspect many people will agree with this one. I spend a lot of time on the road and, right now, I use Google docs while mobile, then re-integrate into my Scriv project when I get home. Obviously a clunky process. I’ve seen how Google syncs in realtime - watching another person typing into a shared doc, his changes were immediately visible. So we know this is possible (using an event/subscriber model).
To me, this would be the #1 top feature; I would happily pay for this.

AI Grammar check
No thanks. I switch off that stuff while writing because it distracts from the most important task of getting ideas onto the page. Google docs is the fkn annoying, interfering busybody leaning over your shoulder. Oh, you didn’t mean to write ‘what’, I’ll change it to ‘that’. Aaag f-off and leave me alone while I write!
I understand Grammarly has a pluggin if you really want, but I use that outside Scriv.

Spell check
The inbuilt Scriv dictionary isn’t great, misses quite a few words, esp for an Australian writer. Misses duplicated words words, tho you could argue that’s grammar.

AI writing
No no no no!!! For writers having their works stolen, this needs no explanation.

Other
Yeah, a few minor things and you’ll have your own ideas, so I’ll leave it there. I hope this triggers a fruitful discussion.

2 Likes
2

:flushed_face:​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

5 Likes
3

Haven’t you heard, Microsoft Word was introduced along with the 4-rotor Enigma, both confounding the allies equally.

8 Likes
4

So, it looks like you are trying to make a code! Would you like some assistance? --Commander Clippy

3 Likes
5

This picture sparked so many ideas… that don’t relate to Scrivener.

I sympathize with your “A.I., no thanks” stance, partially agree with the spell checking (it’s not part of Scrivener, at least on macOS, do you want it to be?), and you won’t find anyone here objecting improvements in the sync department. At the very least for single user workflows.

Probably never going to happen, but: Some kind of “extension API” / “addon system” would be damn cool. I’m aware of the many pitfalls (if anyone isn’t: Start by having an intense look at the heap of abandoned Obsidian plugins), but at least this would solve both the feature creep and “but, but, just this one feature…” problem. Yes, we all have one of those that only three other people need. Or none.

A lot of cross-platform struggles (at least within the Apple ecosystem) will likely become obsolete the more Apple blurs the lines between devices. Of course then there’s still the Windows / Android side lagging behind. But this is the wishful thinking thread, right?

I’m a bit worried when it comes to the future of RTF and Apple’s increasing lack of enthusiasm regarding their own frameworks (TextKit 2, etc.), both being essential for Scrivener.

2 Likes
6

One more thing. Not really a feature, but “open-sourcing” (for lack of a better word) the localization process in one way or another could turn out very beneficial both ways. It’s a huge community. Imagine it improving and sharing “language packs”.

4 Likes
7

Payment model
This might be one of the bits of software that I would be happy to see go subscription. Not because I like that model. I don’t. But because I’m just happy with the current software but happy to support the devs. Maybe even making a subscription optional would be an idea… "What do I get if I purchase a subscription? A: Nothing that you won’t get with an outright purchase, but it helps the team so the only thing you get is karma. The recent BS with apple’s OS up date demonstrated to me that the devs had to run very fast just to stand still. [Do better Apple!]

feature set
I see a lot of requests for extra features (no, not seeking to discount them), but as someone who is writing long form fiction, Scriv works and works bloody well.

The biggest criticism I read, outside of this forum, is "It’s got a big learning curve…but it’s worth it…it’s an outstanding tool. Not a bad problem to have.

I look forward to seeing new features (but I don’t have problems screaming to be solved…). For me the biggest obstacle to writing the next #1 best seller isn’t scriv, it’s my own talent. So while I may be a talentless hack, at least I can sleep easy knowing I’m using best in class software. I really appreciate that I am using ‘software’, and not a browser. And that I can be in the middle of nowhere, without an internet connection, and know that scriv will be very happy.

who is it for?
I wish the dev team all the luck in the world in making this software significantly better…I think it’s a tall ask, unless the scope of the software is increased. The core issue, I think, is ‘who is this software for?’ because some of the feature requests look like people are trying to use software for a purpose it is probably not really for. I’ve not seen any product which would really meet my needs if I was a non-fiction writer - other than DTP software, for example. And that looks like a special form of OCD torture out a closing scene in a fantasy novel - only the hero doesn’t win. He just gets tortured some more. My sense from the devs posting on this forum is they have a very clear idea of purpose.

scriv as part of an ecosystem of tools
Lastly, I think of scrivener as part of a toolbox. Scriv for construction, prowritingaid for self editing, and possibly velum for post compile work.

2 Likes
8

You nailed it, pretty much my thoughts exactly (BTW as a Windows user).

PS in saying I want a sync function, working offline is mandatory. Google docs does that, syncs whenever you’re back online.

1 Like
9

L&L is a small software company with just a few devs and support personnel; offering built-in syncing services is beyond their reach. I say this from reading other debates on the issue. Large tech firms (like the usual suspects) can easily afford such things. You’ll have to rely on DropBox for syncing Scriv projects.

A subscription model has been ruled out.

More than likely someone from the staff will find this and if needed provide more concrete details re: sync and subs, but that’s the scoop from what I recall elsewhere on the forums.

1 Like
10

Thanks for your insight. Syncing isn’t a drop-dead issue for me but, if I were going for a major new version, this would be it.

Ah…[lightbulb]…I think you’re suggesting syncing is more than a development thing - it requires a cloud service, which would be an ongoing cost. Quite likely, good point. Possibly a subscription service if it’s what people want.

11

AI writing
No no no no!!! For writers having their works stolen, this needs no explanation.

And as soon as you publish anything, it’ll be scanned to feed AI systems; I’m afraid you’re simply delaying the inevitable, not preventing it.

That said, if you use dropbox to sync your files, I believe they already scrape the data. Google and Microsoft do too I think.

Now, if we could upload encrypted Scrivener files to cloud systems…

12

That doesn’t sound right, those services should never share private data.

13

This is the gist of it right here. Features in search of problems are how you get bloatware.

We also get a good number of requests for features that are not only out of scope for Scrivener (as currently envisioned), but are currently handled by applications that cost significantly more than Scrivener.

While we understand that writing is not always lucrative and everyone loves a bargain, there’s a reason why those other applications cost what they do, and it’s not (entirely) down to corporate greed. More complex software means more humans to write, maintain, and support it. Cloud syncing (one of the most requested features) requires either building and maintaining our own cloud or entangling ourselves with someone else’s. We feel that staying in our lane – but handling our lane very well – is the best way to continue to offer excellent software at a reasonable price.

14 Likes
15

Uh, lots of people are already doing exactly this?

2 Likes
16

Windows version 3.1.6.0

I, sort of, get the long-format thing. What eludes me is, in pursuit of that, they appear to have lost sight of all the other things that they only seem to give token support to:

  • simple page construction that is WYSIWYG – maybe they can’t be part of a compile, so be it – for now; documents that carry their own attributes. Simple at first: locked; Spell on/off; WYSIWYG on/off. Later maybe: keep formatting attributes on/off, Etc.

  • support for using external editors especially Word (I tried earlier to create a list of other editors, but Word is so DOMINANT I felt others just wanting; oopsie, I forgot; whatever the dominant Mac WP is too; MacWrite?) – Optionally fix your own editor; the Dictionary and Thesaurus are lame at best and I have to keep Word open as a backup to both. I am stunned by the numbers of words I have to add to your base dictionary and wonder what would happen to them if I (or you) changed dictionaries.

  • Research support – weblink management and integration; better document imports and export formats. Way, way better table support.

  • Way better management of linked document and folders; ability to imbed ‘shortcuts’ (not active links) that behave like their targets but are read only (force user to open/locate appropriate project if not open and ready to support shortcut). This would have many uses. In my case in creating (as I have done) a Master Library/Writing Project where for instance Beat Sheet/Roadmaps from all other projects can be gathered in one place for review, sharing, etc. Allow for shared (static) Research files that now need to be replicated in each project. That’s just a start…

  • Sharing – giving, in first incarnation, other user(s) read-only access to a project (Save AS a project to read only and I can send out - if they own Scrivener) then later some type of collaboration functionality – I know collaboration is a big bite.

  • Better support for the Windows community – When I last looked at your updates page it was a bit disheartening; raises the price or offer some type of annual support option to fund it all

There are tons and tons of things in this app that are great and it’s why I continue to use it daily but, it is also why I stand on my back deck and scream at the woods some days (writers block be damned). At least to me, some of the misses are painful and impact root functionality. I have read in these forums about limited resources and staying on path. To that I again offer more money (readily) and to suggest that ‘long form’ aside the obligation here is to the writers first and the publishers and formatters second.

17

Just a quick comment on requests for more “Word-like” features. Scrivener exists in the first place because its creator didn’t like Word.

7 Likes
18

Yeah, heard or read that. Didn’t like Word or Microsoft (very Mac like but those wars are long over - sigh!)? Decent (common) functionality should not be limited by such narrow opinions. I guess if he is the owner then, well, ugh! But let’s not blame revenue and time…

19

If a suggestion is good on its merits – as some of yours are – we’ll consider it subject to availability of resources. That’s why we have a wishlist forum! Just letting you know that “here’s how Word does it” is not an argument that’s going to carry much weight.

6 Likes
20

Yup, understand all of that. I was in software development for close to 40 years. Just to clarify though, I could care less how Word does it (how about “this is how Claris does it”) and would gladly move away (or stop moving back and forth) if I could just do some simple things…

With that though, please understand, I appreciate the fast responses and great support. You all are top notch and way above the norm! Thank you!

2 Likes
21

I used to feel as you do. Then I tried Scrivener as it is (not that you haven’t) and found that the creator’s perspective was much like my own. Just my 2 cents, and, here in the US, they’ve stopped making those.

1 Like