I’m waiting for 3 to be released but have a real problem with waiting for “the best”. That will never happen and never has. Every piece of software I have ever used has always been improved over time, upgraded, updated. Never have I seen any software that has never been improved.
You’re being a bit more literal about my comment than you should be. Of course I know Scrivener 3 won’t be perfect. It’s a manufactured product, but it should have been easily understood that I was only offering my support to the hard working development staff. They do deserve that support. My, “the best”, was a normal social generality that shows good will and faith in their judgement, but I understand that you’re frustrated for whatever reason (even though Scrivener in it’s current form is still better than anything else I’ve used).
Please, never wish anyone you know, “all the best”, or risk being called out for false hope.
I can’t speak for them of course, but I detected no frustration in their message—simply a desire to make sure a “perfection loop” wasn’t what development was stagnating into. If so, I can assure them this is not the case—one must be at a point where all of the screws are in the desk first, let alone final sanding and planing to make sure it doesn’t wobble on the floor, before you can be at risk of applying too many coats of polish!
And thanks for your kind words and support!
You are very welcome for the support, sincerely, and I won’t belabor the frustrated-sounding “real problem with”. That was my interpretation as the comment recipient, but your judgment as moderator stands. Everyone, have a very nice day.
Any new news? Heard they said they were shooting for a release before the end of February. And before anyone jumps my throat and leaves me dead in an alleyway, I know it was not a promise, or anything official. Just curious if someone knows something I don’t.
Please don’t hurt me.
It’s always worth checking the beta update thread: Scrivener 3.0 Beta - Release Candidate 10 (Download Links & Change List)
In this case, the following from the release notes for B40 might help:
The last few betas have had Scrivener shaping up nicely, largely due to conquering the Windows mixed-vendor-world of crazy DPI variations and OS zooming. In beta 40, at last, we believe we have compilation of Styles on par with Mac, full implementations of Multimarkdown and Pandoc, and excellent plain text compilation of screenplays etc…
So that’s not an updated timeline, but it’s noting some key milestones…
Excellent suggestion. I did not even think to look in those beta notes. Not exactly an update, but your right. Definitely a milestone!
I have a problem with a file that shows an empty file, but I write many lines with older versions of Scrivener. How could correct that problem?
You will get better response if you start a new subject about this issue, under the forum which corresponds to the version of Scrivener you use.
Also provide as much detail as possible to make it easier to help you. What version of Scrivener did you use before, what version are you using now, any error messages, etc.
“The last few betas have had Scrivener shaping up nicely, largely due to conquering the Windows mixed-vendor-world of crazy DPI variations and OS zooming. In beta 40, at last, we believe we have compilation of Styles on par with Mac, full implementations of Multimarkdown and Pandoc, and excellent plain text compilation of screenplays etc.”
Yes because everyone knows Windows is an impossible platform for development. That’s why there are so few programs for it. /s
Seriously?? Nearly 3 years to develop an update?? With still no firm release date?? The phrase “developed by clowns, supervised by monkeys” comes to mind because, clearly, they have zero idea of what they are doing. They should be more ashamed of this debacle than they apparently are.
Perhaps more social distancing is called for?
Seriously, it’s not an update, it’s more like a complete from the ground up. I can think of more than a few complex programs that were a similar time in development.
As for the gratuitous insults… Seriously!
Well, if they have no idea what they are doing, perhaps you could tell us all what they are and should be doing. In technical detail, please, based on your experience developing a Windows program of Scrivener’s complexity pretty much all by yourself.
Either you know what they should be doing, and can reveal all; or you don’t, in which case you can’t really say whether they know.
Seriously.
The number of Scrivener style applications for Windows are, indeed, an indicator of how hard it is to develop Scrivener style applications for Windows. There are lots of them for MacOS, and even a rather hefty chunk for iOS. For Android, I know of none, and for Windows, I’d be hard pressed to name more than a handful, and most of those are ports of Linux applications. None of the Windows ones are nearly as mature as Scrivener, though some of the MacOS ones definitely are.
The same goes for pretty much all text management applications. Windows versions tend to be simple. Basically text editors which can open multiple files at the same time, but not with complex management between them. Linux versions will often leverage databases, and in the end create more “wiki like” experiences. And MacOS versions will handle complex tasks with ease, in various flavors of end user experience.
There is a reason for this. It’s not that Windows is overall harder to develop for. It’s because Windows has nothing like the Cocoa text system. Nothing at all. And that is the core around which MacOS Scrivener is built. Which isn’t to say MacOS Scrivener is a trivial application - very far from it - but one thing it doesn’t have to worry about is managing the details of the bits of text floating around inside of it. Cocoa provides amazing help in doing that part.
Thank you for this @theswede It’s given me a great understanding of what L&L are up against with making Scrivener run to a high quality on Windows and I think it reinforces why it takes longer and that they’re doing their best to get it to us in a state worth spending money on.
I’d love to see a blog update as the last one was November last year but, if it’s potentially not that far off then it’s worth waiting a few more weeks.
That’s nonsense. There are Papyrus and Patchwork. Both of them are without any doubt more mature than Scrivener, Just because you don’t know any Scrivener style applications for Windows that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
And yes, I’m also rather annoyed about a) the delay for Scrivener 3 and b) all the apologists in this forum. Literature and Latte haven’t simply been able to develop their software in the time they promised.
You quoted him out of context (deliberately?). He said he was unaware of more than a handful of Windows equiv’s. You quoted two, which is certainly far less than a handful. I found Papyrus which does look powerful, however to get all the best features you have to pay the equivalent of a full Scrivener program purchase every 3-4 months. I can see how that is a great incentive.
You also decried the ‘apologists’, no, people who understand reality is a more accurate description.
Thank you for sharing. I haven’t seen many other apps that try to do what Scrivener does.
Papyrus Author seems like a very nice app, although the pro version, at $14.99/MO, is vastly more expensive then Scrivener. (And you’ll need the pro version if you want typewriter mode. 
)
Patchwork seems like a non-existent app, as google doesn’t seem to know about it. Mind sharing a link?
If these apps are so good, why are you annoyed at L&L? Why don’t you just use them instead of Scrivener? I’m honestly curious; this question is not intended as snark.
Best,
Jim
No, I did not quote him out of context. Read again.
No.