Not to be deterred, I now have this program working in Windows. It is for novel writing, not academic writing, I can tell fairly well. What do you use it for? Shedding Khawatir uses it for all research but I am not yet sure how.
What do you use beyond a word processor, file folders and index cards? I file things on secret blogs, which can have Pages and Links that allow you to see where the other pieces of the text are at all times.
What about Zotero? What about JabRef? Is EndNote necessary?
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 
There are templates on scrivener for academic essays as well as diction.
This is why it is disappointing — it seems to be a set of templates. What am I missing / why do people like it?
I dn’t know why people like it. Downloaded a free trial version and ddn’t really use it. I just use microsoft word and my own brain. I order the chapters in a file like this
000 prelims
001 chapter 1
etc…
Then they are all in a file folder in order. I keep in in dropbox so I can work anywhere. I have a separate file folder for any other material I have. PDFs of articles, etc… Then I just write. I keep a master bibliography in which I enter complete information on each source I cite, as I go along. I am very minimalistic so I dn’t want any program that creates more work for me.
Yes — I was thinking it would be useful for my alleged novel which, unlike academic writing, I am not sure I have started at the beginning. But Scrivener is far too constraining. I think I will keep the novel notes where they are.
I had also fantasized that Scrivener might let you write while having links to the side of other drafts and of key texts you want to refer to. But no, what one already has will do this better, it seems.
Why bother with templates? Not trying to be hostile here, just asking.
Yes, the templates are a real problem. I did not realize Scrivener was based on these, and they are why I have lost interest.
Scrivener isn’t based on those templates. Those are just training wheels that you learn how to use the app with. Just use the blank starter if you don’t want them. I never use them, but I have a few of my own I have made with the settings I prefer. It’s also not a process or anything that replaces your brain, it just makes the dumb little mechanical things easier to do, like switching from one chapter file to another—that’s so easy in Scrivener everything else feels like a chore. Hence, it isn’t just for novelists either. It’s about as general purpose as any other editor.
I see that but have not yet seen the advantages. Opening a different chapter file isn’t problematic in the word processors I use, although having different windows going at once and having them all nicely visible and easily resizeable is not easy, at least not for me, and this is why I was interested in Scrivener. I’d be more excited if I could make it work on Linux.
I like the idea of having notes and links along the side of a word processor, as in a blog, in the same window, and being able to switch among windows in such an environment. I was hoping Scrivener would do this, but it does not seem to … ?
And the instructions say it is just for raw composing, you have to then transfer your piece to a real word processor anyway later on, which suggests to me I might as well stick with one such in the first place.
This is making me think Scrivener is sort of like the iPad, “streamlined” and “easy” but not the same as having a full computer … ? An optional accessory more than a central tool … ?
Yeah, it’s not hard to open files, but Scrivener makes switching between things so easy that the notion of “chapter file” itself becomes a bit of a relic. With Scrivener it’s so easy to bounce around and pull things together that I’ve even heard of people using paragraph-length files. I don’t go that far. I use it for non-fiction and stop at the subsection level (with a few exceptions). But just having an outline in chapter/section/subsection format of the entire book is very nice. That’s one thing you can’t do in Word as well: be editing some technical detail in chapter 32 and realise that impacts a sentence in chapter 8. In Word it’s a bit of a pain to do that, and you might even write it down as a reminder for later. In Scrivener it’s a click and then a back button click (like in a browser) to get back to where you were working. So I think agility is the key phrase. It’s not that opening .docx files in a folder is hard to do, there are just better ways out there. In my opinion.
Scrivener’s system is a little weird and takes some getting used to. For instance my mind exploded when I realised you could nest files under other files. But once you figure out what the programmer was going for it becomes second nature.
Notes and links: try the inspector. That has a note field for each outline document. There is also access to a global notepad there. You can have lists of URLs, files and other things in the project, it’s the bookshelf button at the bottom. In addition to the inspector, the editor can be split so you can load research material or old revisions alongside what you are writing in. Great stuff. Again nothing you can’t do in Word, but it’s just easier!
Publishing: in my experience Scrivener works fine for export, but I use the Mac so there might be better options there as it is older. I know they say you should use a word processor, but I think they just say that for the picky people. For me, as long as the font and margins are right I’m okay. I’m just submitting this thing, not turning it into paper and ink. But even if you do need one, that seems fine to me. I don’t know about you, but I spend many months if not years on a single work. That is where I’m using Scrivener, and making it all look pretty is something that takes a few hours at the end. Big deal if I have to use something else. Ask other professionals if they use one single program for everything. 🙂
As for being so-called “streamlined”, I don’t think so. It’s probably one of the deepest programs I own. I rank it up there with stuff like Photoshop because it is doesn’t give you highways to do things: it gives you the tools to build your own highway. Let me just say this: I know the type of junk software you are talking about and I don’t like it. So I’d otherwise probably agree with you if Scrivener classified. I don’t like this new “simple is better” movement.
That’s just my experience anyway. I had to plug through for a while learning with the templates and picking things up. But once it all clicked in my head, I could take my own road and make my own templates. Why am I writing all of this to a perfect stranger? I guess because the software has helped me out that much. It just makes most of the digital parts of writing that are the boring, annoying bits and solving them so you don’t have to worry much about anything but the creative work. It sounds ridiculous, but it has changed how I write for the better, without a system or an ideology. Just by stepping in and taking care of the mundane crap.
No, seriously I think I may put my novel in it. Not being able to get it to work on Linux is really the largest problem. I am so used to doing academic things more like Jonathan’s way that trying to switch to Scrivener wholesale may just be irritating. But for something like the novel, it is a good place to start.
I started using Scrivener for compiling a poetry collection and doing other work that I knew I would want to rearrange a lot. I then started using it for research writing because I figured out that I can also keep notes and articles in the sidebar. (I use it with Zotero for references.)
I love Scrivener for research. I don’t use the templates. I start with a blank template. Under the draft folder, I add documents for each part of my article (i.e. intro, lit review, theoretical framework, method, etc, this will vary by article and filed). I then make a plan folder, and put under it a very brief outline/structure, a document with my big general ideas, and a document that lists journal specifics. The extent to which any of these are fleshed out varies greatly depending on what I am writing. Then, under the research folder I add what I would have in the past kept on index cards and in file folders. I do not keep actual articles in this folder (although you could), but rather my notes on them (which are full of quotes). If a particular article/book is central to the topic, I will have the full set of notes in there. Otherwise, I will just copy in the relevant snippets (or what I think are relevant at the time). Sometimes I do this by article (i.e. a document called Author 2010) and sometimes by topic (i.e. gender). It depends on the article and how advanced my ideas/prior research is. In general, I am reading as I am writing, so this folder keeps growing. I also have documents for primary sources, sometimes by source and sometimes by topic (in my case, these are interviews and the like, for you I’d guess it would be another type of text). So, in the sidebar, I have three main folders (Draft, Plan, Research) and lots of documents underneath them.
Then when I write, I split the screen, so the part I am writing is in the top (i.e. lit review) and my relevant notes are on the bottom. I can switch between note groups without losing my writing. There is no reason I can think of that you couldn’t do this with multiple windows of a word processor. However, I find it easier to just click on the document in the sidebar to switch notes than cycle through a bunch of windows. If I am writing a lot from snippets, I like to use the index card display to arrange them how I am planning to write (as I used to do with actual index cards in the past)
Once I’ve written the part (and I don’t always write the parts in order, so this is another reason I like Scrivener) it is usually too long. So then I make a new document called something like “Lit Review Extra” and start cutting stuff into it (this way, it’s cut, but if I need it again, it’s easy to find).
The final advantage is that if I want to read the whole article as one, instead of parts, I just click on the documents and they all flow together in one text. To me, this makes a difference over clicking through multiple documents in a word processor.
For citations, I use a program called Bookends, and just copy the citation in as I’m writing (easy to do when you are writing from a document called Author 2010 or from snippets that also have this information). I’d imagine this works with any citation program.
In any case, I find Scrivener works better than a word processor for my method of writing, but I think it is really about finding tools that work with how you write, which is different for different people even if the end result is a similar looking article.
I forgot to add that you can insert links of all sorts too between documents and other things like email and the web, although I personally do not use this feature.
Yes. All of this, what you say in both comments, is why I am interested in Scrivener, because from descriptions like yours I have the impression that it would make it easier to do what I do anyway and am trying to find an all electronic way to do. I can do as Jonathan does and not learn a new program, but I have the idea that ultimately I would really like this. (It actually seems the closest to what I used to do pre word processor days.)
Do you then have it on all your computers, though? Do you keep your things in the cloud? I think what I might do is like Switaj, start by putting my novel into it (it is in a blog site now, which is getting to be inadequate although it does make the locations of all pieces visible in an ordered, but non hierarchical way, which I like), organize the research stuff better in the meantime, and then see where I really want to move.
Yes, I have it on both my computers (you can use the same license on up to three so long as you are the only user of them, I think). I keep my stuff in the cloud (Google Drive, although I think Dropbox, which I use for sharing teaching materials is better) which does not bother me at all but does bother some people.
Well, it seems that the Linux users are using Scrivener under WINE (a Windows emulator) because it is still not working for Linux. I have half my things in Dropbox and half in the Ubuntu cloud and the chaotic proliferation of programs and operating systems is part of my problem.
Similar to Scrivener, but for Linux, there are several programs: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11927216
I’ve been using it so that I can see the whole manuscript (holes and all) at once and also because shiny toys make me want to work. I haven’t been really writing it in it yet, though.
I am starting to understand what it is. It is a wiki. That is why I am attracted to it. One person likes to use Zim, which is a wiki, to keep stuff and brainstorm, and then Textroom to compose.
Hi this is somewhat of off topic but I was wanting to know if blogs
use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML.
I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding knowledge so I wanted to get advice from someone with experience. Any help would be enormously appreciated!
Hi – your blog is nice — you can use either WYSIWYG or code manually. I would look into Drupal as an option http://drupal.org/ and I do like WordPress (the platform I am using here).