True - but that “matter of coding” is very different when there is only one person working on a product compared to when there are ten or a hundred people. We’re a tiny team, and I’m the sole developer of the Mac product. Scrivener is relatively cheap, and it’s a niche product - we do pretty well for indie software but there’s no sign we’re going to be catapulted into the big league that would allow us to hire scores of developers any time soon (and as for motivation, honestly, I’m not sure I’d want that anyway - I value my lifestyle, too, and working on indie software with a close tie to users - even when they’re berating something - with no office is all part of what I love about L&L).
To give you an example: yesterday I fired up El Capitan to test out changes Apple has made to the text system. It turns out those changes had broken end-of-page footnotes code I’d written for print/PDF for our next major version, which took about a week in itself, so I had to spend a day fixing that up. You may not like the fact that there are limitations imposed on what a company can do by how large that company is, but it’s a fact of life.
There are no plans for it currently, but if we ever do end up with a team of developers and our own cloud centre, who knows? 
As Robert says, there are a couple of features in the next version of Scrivener (codename “Scrivener Brown Willy” - if Apple is going for California mountains, we’re going for Cornish hills) that will make collaboration a little easier via import and tracking Scrivener documents within exported files, but nothing like live team editing.
Oh, that old chestnut. And yes, likewise, if someone comes along and copies Scrivener but adds MORE/CONT’D support for printing screenplays, a lot of users will abandon Scrivener and migrate to it. And if someone comes along and copies Scrivener but adds a timeline, lots of users will abandon Scrivener and migrate to it. And if someone comes along… Well, you get the idea. We’re always being told that we’ll lose all our users if we don’t add X (where X is whatever feature the person proclaiming our imminent doom wants).
And there it is again. Without wishing to sound arrogant, or jinxing our future sales, before implying that our users are jumping ship to Ulysses because we are “out of date”, you might want to check the Mac App Store sales rankings - and then bear in mind that we make most of our sales through our own site and Amazon, not through the Mac App Store. Despite our glacial slowness with the iOS version - which is bound to have hurt us - rumours of our demise are… Well, you know.
Well, that’s an easy one: I don’t have the will or the volition to introduce team-based features, because I would not be able to do them the justice they would deserve given our current resources. There are also many other features that are much higher up users’ wish lists based on our interactions with customers.
Indeed it does - they are, in fact, entirely different programs with completely different feature-sets and philosophies. The only thing they really have in common is that they are both applications for writers. If Ulysses suits you better, you should definitely go ahead and use it - Ulysses is a wonderful application with some great developers behind it.
Are you sure you don’t want to be rude? And no, the “collaborative stuff” for Scrivener is categorically not “the same song”: we have said from the very beginning that there are no plans for any collaborative features in Scrivener, so we have misled no one. If real-time collaborative writing is crucial for you, you should use other software, in the same ways as if image editing is critical for you, you should use other software, or if creating newsletters with text flow around images is crucial for you, you should use other software.
We have hundreds of thousands of customers, each with different needs, and we’re not sitting on our laurels but are working hard to provide great software that will keep our customers happy for years to come. Yes, the iOS version has been an utter disaster in terms of how long it has taken to get out - and we have no harsher critic than reepicheep in that regard - and I’m as sick and tired of having to tell users that we are still ironing out bugs in internal testing as users are sick and tired of hearing us say that it’s not ready yet (because yes, it really should have been ready, months ago) - but we’re not just sitting around letting the Mac or Windows versions get old. Behind the scenes there has been over two years of work put into the next major version - and this “way of life” you cite involves ten or twelve hours of coding a day for much of the time (which isn’t a complaint, as I enjoy it for the most part, but just an illustration of the fact that we’re not bumming around at the beach). So no, there will be no real-time collaborative features, but no, that doesn’t mean that Scrivener is getting dusty and old; it just means it doesn’t do what you want it to do, even though we never said it would. Version 2.6 is looking a bit hoary in the UI, but 2.7 will address that, and Scrivener Brown Willy will provide a raft of features and enhancements, and performance and under-the-hood improvements, that ensure Scrivener is fully modernised and ready for the future.
This whole conversation is off-topic, though - this thread is supposed to be about Scrivener and Scapple for Android (yes, we have plans for Scrivener for Android).
:mrgreen: 
