Wish for Scrivener and Scapple for Android

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? :slight_smile: 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sound arrogant, or jinxing our future sales, before implying that our users are jumping ship to Ulysses because we are “out of date”, you might want to check the Mac App Store sales rankings - and then bear in mind that we make most of our sales through our own site and Amazon, not through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? :slight_smile: 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).

Go right ahead. Let us know when you have something ready to share with the public.


Those of us who are computing scientists, software engineers, programmers, system architects, coders, knowledgeable dabblers, or users won’t be holding our breath while waiting for rfog to do this.

A brief history lesson.

Writely, the predecessor of Google Docs, was launched in 2005, so it actually predates Scrivener. Google acquired the company in 2006. Google acquired DocVerse, an online collaboration company, in 2010. Offline editing capability was added in 2012, standalone mobile apps in 2014.

So, Google Docs as we know it today is the product of a full decade of development, most of it by a company with effectively unlimited resources. The Writely and DocVerse acquisitions alone cost about $35 million. The on-call support rotation for Google Docs has more people than L&L has employees.

And while it’s true that Google Docs offers excellent real-time collaboration features, it’s still only capable of handling one document at a time, with nothing resembling the organizational and multi-document features that set Scrivener apart.

Just so we’re clear on the level of “will” and “volition” we’re talking about.


:neutral_face: :confused: :slight_smile: :smiley: :laughing: :mrgreen: :unamused:

“Supposed to be”?! If you weren’t Mr. Lit & Lat himself, I’d suggest that you’d never visited the third page of any L&L forum post. :stuck_out_tongue:

:laughing: “Supposed to be”. Funny.

Taking a sabbatical is cheating. Keith is heading a small business and programming the flagship product of said business. If all he lacks is will, then you should be able to bang this out over a year’s worth of lunch breaks.

But seriously, if you can make this dunder-head-proof, so that it wouldn’t completely muck up the works of a Scrivener project… well, I’d be impressed. I wouldn’t actually use such a feature, mind you. I have no need nor desire for real-time collaboration, and I wouldn’t even consider abandoning Scrivener for software just because it had live collaboration features built-in.

But I’d be duly impressed.

By the way, I never mentioned a cloud/real time collaboration feature in the last posts. That was a not so subtle strawman

I talked about a control version feature compatible with synchronizing software such as dropbox. Please re-read it. I talked about an optional, actionable feature which could override the entire project protection and protect only the changed files. Besides, if there is a conflict, there should be a conflict resolution as which happens with any control version system or diff comparison

Not dozens of developers or dozens of thousands of programming hours. No cloud. A version control.

See my response up-thread. All files in the project can potentially change whenever the project is open. Among other commands with potential project-scale implications:

  • All Binder operations: file create/delete/split/merge; drag/drop; outline indent/outdent.

  • All Formatting commands.

  • All Project Search/Replace commands.

  • Most meta-data commands: keywords, status, labels, compile include/exclude, etc.

  • Many “routine” editing commands: Append To file, Auto-generate synopsis, Append Synopsis to file.

And that’s just off the top of my head.

There’s also the need to accommodate users working offline, and as a result causing project-wide changes completely independently of each other that then have to be merged and reconciled.

I did not mention real-time collaboration as a strawman. I mentioned it because, one way or the other, any collaboration solution has to deal with exactly the same issues. In some ways, asynchronous collaboration is harder than real time, because the potential for conflict creation is greater: if I’m watching my partner edit a project, then I’ll probably notice if he deletes an entire section. But what if I’m offline, and busily editing the section that he is in the process of deleting?


This subject has been done to death.

Keith has stated clearly there will be no live collaboration version of Scrivener.

Berating Keith and his team in the hope that if you keep on the same old song for long enough they’ll give in and do what you want is a waste of time and bandwidth.

As Keith has said, if you insist that’s what you want, move to something else.

Meanwhile the thousands of us VERY happy with L&L’s direction will continue to enjoy using a superb program. (and look forward to the iOS version) :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

I’ve always wanted to do that … 8)

[size=150]He looks like Jony[/size] :laughing: :laughing:

Jony’s hair is cooler.

That, and it’s not terribly difficult to create problems in collaborative Google Docs, Office online docs, or ANY collaborative solution that does not rely on locking at least portions of the document. And locks create their own sets of problems.

Scriv isn’t perfect – but it’s great for who it is aimed for.

Yesterday I purchased a license for Scrivener. It is an amazing software, and I really think that it is a must for writers! :slight_smile:

I would like to suggest to create a Scrivener Android app, in order to connect and check our projects. Sometimes you are “on the go” and you want to store research files, save a photo you have taken on your mobile, write down useful ideas or even check your notes for inspiration. Having an app connected to our files would be amazing!

For example, you could have something similar that has SafeInCloud: you may use Google Drive, Dropbox or SkyDrive to store projects, and access them from computer and mobile device. Even WebDAV.

A writer doesn’t stop thinking on his/her project. We should be able to still working when we are not in front of our computers.

Love Scrivener! Many thanks to all!

Keep waiting :stuck_out_tongue: They haven’t even finished the iOS version, and only after they’ve done that will they start on Android. Hopefully it wouldn’t be too hard to port from iOS to Android (shorter than from Mac/Windows to iOS), but don’t hold your breath!

Nice to know that it is planned! You rock guys! Well done!

Hello and welcome to Scriv’s fora. I’m sure the scallywags at L&L, will be more than appreciative of the warmth and positivity contained within your first post. Your kind of positivity and encouragement is like sprinkling fertiliser on the seedbed of creativity, which yields that enthusiasm without which all creative endeavour withers and dies. Your kind of infectious enthusiasm, will be inspirational to all those of us, reading your post.
Bienvenido a Scrivener, diana :wink:
Take care

Agreed that it’s a boon for writers to be able to visit their projects on the fly. But I’d propose that for a tightly compressed, cost-effective, platform-agnostic, mobile rendition of the project, we look to the one we’re already making, an e-book.

Our ideal writer’s e-book would not be the one generated when we click “Compile”, reflecting our inclusions, exclusions, chapter headers and preferences, but rather a full binder view, document-oriented, auto-generated in the background, and posted periodically (or on Exit) to the cloud server or Bluetooth device of our choice.

I know there’s been much time and treasure invested in the iOS version, and I’m sure the results will be bang-up. But consider the risk we’re asking L&L to undertake, that of developing a superb and compatible writing tool for use on these less-than-optimal writing platforms. Concerns of the old silk purse. Thinking L&L would serve the mobile user better, sooner, by offering a background module that renders a project for universal mobile view, and charging something extra for it.

Rgds – Jerome

Except we didn’t ask them. It might have seens some suggestions of mobile versiosn — although I recall KB’s first reaction to my idea that Scrapple would have been better if implemented first (and only) on iPads — but the risk was entirely theirs when they took it upon themselves to write the app.

The full mobile app does have a constituency, represented on this thread. I was indeed using the polite, inclusive “we” to deliver a counterargument.

Rgds – Jerome