Why Scrivener

I just bought Scrivener, have been using it, and have been liking it so far. One thing I don’t use is the Ric h Text editor features because I write in Markdown or plain text. This begs the question: Why use Scrinver? Why not just plain text or markdown in a bunch of folders?

See my Reddit response:

reddit.com/r/scrivener/comm … _scrivner/

Not trying to be condescending, as yours is a legitimate question, but L&L’s marketing does a pretty good job of summarizing the feature set that Scrivener has over the alternatives in your post.

So have a look at that here: https://www.literatureandlatte.com/scrivener/overview

Or you can do what I do when evaluating software, and skim the manual. Despite its size, this will take less time than you think, because you can ignore all the stuff having to do with formatting.

Then decide: How much are those features worth to you?

ETA: You’ll get more specific answers if you provide more specific info about yourself. Are you a novelist, or a scientist, or a lawyer? Etc. What type of writer are you? Are you very structured and develop an idea from the top down, or is it more about being free to write whatever part of your work whenever you want? Etc.


The simplest answer is to work your way through the Interactive Tutorial, which is a good overview of Scrivener’s capabilities. Rich text editing is probably the least unique thing that Scrivener does.


I use markdown (MD) in my note-taking app, so I’m comfortable with it – I use a lot of LaTex too, but that’s another story. Rich Text gives us many features that would be extensions to MD. Seeing emphasis on the page, for example (without tags); or narrowing margins to indicate a letter or note; or annotation and highlights, and being able to search in them.

But, of course, you don’t have to use those (and many other) features.

If you don’t need Scrivener’s features, then it’s probably not the best tool for the job. As I mentioned above, I use other tools for note-taking and other collections of text.