Comments on: MPU 015: Scrivener

By: T. J. Lahey

T. J. Lahey — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:18:01 +0000

I only heard about Scrivener after I got the very similar program Ulysses (http://www.the-soulmen.com/ulysses/), but I’ve heard very little in the way of comparisons between them.

My personal wish is a program that understands LaTeX, not just as export since I write things with lots of equations and other LaTeX features. Plus, syntax colouring is handy for these kinds of things. So, I generally find that I don’t use Ulysses that much, instead I use TextMate.

By: Kevin Morton

Kevin Morton — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 01:34:40 +0000

Nice show. Got me thinking about whether I should revisit Scrivener when doing legal research and writing. Unlike David, I don’t use Scrivener in this way. Long post describes why here: http://bit.ly/7ygwdo

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 16:42:45 +0000

Excellent show. As a dedicated Notebook user, I have never felt the need to use Scrivener. Your show is equally applicable to Notebook and I’m using it in a whole new way now.

Happy Holidays.

Scott

By: Ed

Ed — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:22:03 +0000

Thanks for another great episode, David and Katie. I’m now really tempted to try Scrivener for my next writing project.

MacPromote also just announced a 25% coupon: http://macpromote.com/mac-promo-scrivener-manage-large-writing-proj

Getting it for $30 seems like a no-brainer.

By: Sandi

Sandi — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:36:13 +0000

I’ve bought this program and it does take time to learn all its features. One that I particularly like is the ability to highlight text in various colours and then search for specific highlights. This makes annotating to go back later to address issues very easy.

I will be interested to hear your next podcast which will, I understand, cover Circus Ponies.

By: Niran Sabanathan

Niran Sabanathan — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:29:40 +0000

Thanks for a good review of Scrivener. Keith Blount has made a program that is as much a conceptual leap forward as the Spreadsheet was from the calculator. Traditional wordprocessor do very little to harness the potential of the computer. They are not much of a leap frow the typewriter and manual cutting and pasting. But, Scrivener easily allows for non-linear writing and thinking.

One point though – Kate had mentioned that she was worried about being stuck in a proprietary system. All the files in a scrivener package are RTF. So your work is only stuck if you can’t read RTF.

By: Teresa

Teresa — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:27:24 +0000

Loved the show. Not being a writer, I have no reason to use Scrivener, but I want it in any case. I’ve downloaded it and I plan on finding a use for it, even if I don’t have the obvious reason.

You two do such a terrific job of presenting these topics. Once again thanks for all your hard work!

By: Todd Peperkorn

Todd Peperkorn — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:26:00 +0000

Great show! Thoroughly enjoyed it. Here are a few questions/comments that are floating around for me:

1. What is the best way to import Pages documents? I know they can be exported to Word/RTF, but is there any way to do it from the file level?

2. I understand the point of separating the writing process from the page layout process. I still wish it would be possible to tag paragraphs with styles, even if they don’t show up.

3. I have a couple specific programs that I use for textual study (Accordance and Logos), and there is no way I can think of exporting that data into Scrivener. Is there any way of linking to an external program file so that when you click on it it will open the file?

That’s it for now. Great show. I look forward to more to come!

Todd

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 06:26:46 +0000

Great podcast! I’ve always thought Scrivener looked interesting, but never really got it until this podcast.

Now I’m considering buying a copy, even though I am forced to do all my writing at work on a PC, so not even sure how much use I would get from it.

But it’s good to see the word processor being ‘re-thought’.