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…
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yes, Papyrus is quite expensive, I know that. But the poster I replied to claimed that there are only a handful of Windows alternatives for Scrivener which are mostly Linux ports and none was as mature as Scrivener. So, that was the point I was trying to make. I didn’t put the links in there because I didn’t think that someone wanted to look them up. Sorry. (Btw, there is also DramaQueen but I haven’t tested it yet, so I don’t know about that. And I think it’s also only in German. dramaqueen.info)
And I think you’re well aware of Bibisco. But the workflow in that one is different, so I don’t know if that even counts as an alternative.
The reason I’m annoyed is simply because the new version should already be there and I don’t understand why the Mac version has been prioritized. Now, I’ve been waiting for quite some time now. I’ve been patient. Downloaded the new beta. Been patient, Downloaded a new beta. Been patient, downloaded a new beta and so on. You get the picture … And yes, I have read all those comments about how much easier it is in MacOS blahblahblah and it just seems patronizing to me. If you officially support two platforms you also have to actually support both of them, period. It’s been years now!
And I have to admit that part of my annoyance also comes from the simple fact that I have two Scrivener projects in v3 that don’t open in v1.9. (And oh yes, I’m just waiting for the smartly comments à la “it’s your own fault, you should have made a backup”) I’d be much less annoyed if I could simply open it in the old version instead of having to download a new beta every month or so.
.
Why I don’t just switch to a different program? I already have Scrivener and I am used to it. And, more importantly, I’d have to export my existing projects to a new program, all the notes and tidbits. I’m actually a little bit too lazy to do that. That goes for my older projects. For my newer stuff I already use something else. (Softmaker Office, which is not a Scrivener-like program but I found a way to combine it with a folder structure that works perfectly for me and I have cross-platform compatibility to Linux)
You had mentioned not being able to open beta projects in v1.9. Kind of reading between the lines here, but do you mean you’re tired of the beta update cycle and want to return to v1.9? If so, it’s been a while since I’ve tried it, but I think you can just drag and drop items from the beta binder to the v1.9 binder, although I’m not sure whether that brings across meta-data. But worth a try, if reverting back is your goal at the moment.
Rather the contrary, as you yourself support with your examples.
A piece of software which has taken a dedicated C++ team a decade to get to the current level of polish - and then it can’t do half of what Scrivener can do. A perfect example of the amount of effort required to develop something of this kind for Windows. It literally takes re-implementing the Cocoa text system, and that is something only a handful of companies have even tried to do.
Which is my point.
Patchwork is not even translated to English yet, so it is very far from the maturity of Scrivener. And like Papyrus Author, it does a lot less than Scrivener.
I never said “none”, I said “a handful”, which you even quote. Arguing against a straw man does you no favors.
My point was, is and remains that Scrivener style software is very rare on Windows, because it takes enormous effort to develop compared to on MacOS. If you want to argue that point, and not a straw man, feel free to do so. Otherwise I think we’re done here.
Yes, the first thing I tried was to drag and drop everything over. But I have a lot of stuff in folders and sub-folders and I can’t just drag and drop the folder, I’d need to drag and drop every single file within Scrivener. And that’s not really comfortable. But returning to 1.9 would indeed be my only option. Also, I realize that I came across sort of angry in this thread but well … I was, it was late and English is not my native language. Sorry to all …
Look, it a) of course differs in its core functionality but it can do a lot that Scrivener can’t do and b) I don’t care in which language it was written. I don’t care about “Cocoa” or any fanboyism for Apple. I care about getting the same product for Windows as you get for Apple. Not because I feel entitled but because the company promised to release it as such in a given timeframe. I wouldn’t even care if Scrivener was only for Apple as long as they wouldn’t have promised it for Windows as well. I already said that I have been patient but it’s been a long time now and at some point I had to voice my disappointment.
But I have to ask you: why do you even bother to respond when you are obviously an Apple user who doesn’t care about the Windows version and its (potential) users at all?
It is more specified towards fiction writing but maybe you should learn German to be able to look up its functionality. Translation to English is only a minor issue and one that doesn’t bother me at all (I speak German).
Oh my, so I misquoted you (well, unintentionally and actually not eve that far off). So sorry. I’m not aware of any Scrivener style software on Apple, so what now? Who cares about that? It doesn’t matter to me or any end-user how hard or not hard it is to develop on a given platform. Your beloved Cocoa also doesn’t matter. What matters: there was a release date. Long time ago. And still no release, just beta after beta. But well, at this point I’m not sure why I even posted in this forum because nothing will change. I will still use Scrivener for my already existing projects until I find the leisure to convert them, otherwise I just have to move on. And that’s a shame because I liked the program and the company for various reasons like the discount for NaNo or giving away the Linux version for free.
)