Voidtools Everything

Posted by 22111
Apr 7, 2022 at 04:51 PM

Scrivener or Writer’s One-Stop Shop

Above, I incriminate, among other things, (especially) iPeople’s inclination to search for “better”, but then to content themselves with what their choice-of-the-moment deigns to give them, instead of giving a little thinking to how they could do something “about” that choice, within that choice.

This thought inescapably brings me to consider Scrivener again, since there are some factors, quite surprising taken in combination, around that software.

- Windows version is really bad but sold at the same price as the Mac version; at the beginning, the former was understandable since a second (alleged team of?) developer(s) coded that version, after the tremendous success of the Mac version; now, many years later, the former, together with the latter, has to be considered a scam

- Search amazon.com for “Scrivener”, and you’ll see it’s tremendously successful software (Mac-wise at least), there being available many different books, from different authors, around it, similar to books about MS Office software (Some of those are electronic books only, but the number of paper books is quite astonishing indeed.)

- This impression gets fortified by web searches: Fora and other sites abound where Scrivener is discussed at length and in every imaginable detail, be them sites with a “software for writers” subject or just “writing” sites in general

- In spectacularly big contrast to the above, there do not seem many add-ins, add-ons or similar tools, macros or such available which would / could fill the multiple (!) voids (cf. “Voidtools”) in (even Mac’s, not even speaking of Windows’ here) Scrivener’s functionality and/or its user-interface (lack of) “smoothness”

- And that in the presence of the (Mac version’s unique?) developer’s almost systematic refusal to fill these voids himself (that’s at least what I, subjectively, got from reading many times in various fora, incl. the official one)

- Thus, (Mac’s) Scrivener’s current situation, from its developer’s motivational point of view, seems (to me) comparable to (Window’s) Ultra Recall’s: bugs are exterminated, and that’s it, more or less, notwithstanding persevering, extreme “blanks” in functionality (and multiple user demands to fill them)

- The difference between the two programs, from my specific point of view detailed here, being that Scrivener has almost got a monopoly (!) to the writer’s market

(and seemingly more than 90 p.c. of (paid or would-be) writers “being on Mac” anyway, cf. the almost total lack of Windows writers’ software from other entities which do (after-all, not-so-much) “parallel” Mac-and-Windows versions (e.g. Write Bros., and others)),
with almost anybody “writing” (i.e. fiction of any kind) out there having bought (or then even updated) Scrivener,

whilst UR is more or less “dying” software in the sense of there (allegedly, perhaps I’m wrong: I judge from their forum activity (with rarely any new member, among other indicators) not being many new users, so that, contrary to (always Mac’s, as said) Scrivener, the (allegedly sole again) developer’s lack of motivation is understandable

- Thus, with Scrivener, we have got an (for seemingly “specialized” software) almost incredible “eco system”, BUT which confines itself to book sales and endless rhabarber-rhabarber of the (allegedly) millions of (more or less keeping-at) users in fora all over the place, without any relevant software / tools contributions, and this, financially- and acceptance-wise, extremely successful software, thus remaining far from “perfect” or “optimized”... or even “intuitive” (! cf. the forum posts), whatever

- Which brings me to the conclusion that there is no “market” for such “helper tools”, since “writers” (most of them of the would-be kind, naturally) and/or iPeople, in general (my latter allegation seemingly confirmed by what I’ve observed and mentioned in my previous posts here), REFUSE to “fiddle around” with “technics”... or should I rather say, with “technicalities”?

- And that seems to be the inherent, false “beauty” of Scrivener: Weren’t it a (quite bad, and would-be) Writer’s One-Stop Shop, its financial success would probably be just one tenth of what it seemingly is, since those alleged millions, instead of adopting it, would very probably refrain from it, getting the (as explained and as it is, non-existant) info that it was “not complete”, and for completeness, it would need “upgrading” of some sorts (i.e. provided by third-parties)

- Which brings us to Apple, Mac, iWhatever in general where the “designer” (you couldn’t call them “manufacturer”, could you?) does apply every means available to them for preventing such “upgrading” of any sorts… with the result that their products sell like hotcakes

- And that brings me to a very deep irony here, especially, but not exclusively, with regards to the aforementioned would-be writers (whilst paid ones, I think, will need other things on top; can’t say definitely, since, as said, I am on Windows, and would never touch this “scriveners”’ thing on either platform):

Obviously, they want a “perfect, rounded-up gestalt”, in order to feel “complete”, while “producing” something which inherently is, and will always be - and even beyond any possible publication date - incomplete: Those people fear the insecurity of the way to the - any - “product”, and so, they use Apple products, those allegedly self-contained, in fact severely limiting ones, as their constant downer, whilst e.g. Hemingway (the writer, not the “Manhattan” co-star) used alcohol in order to keep overwhelming insecurity at bay - and obviously, the allegedly “complete”, “rounded-up” Scrivener is the perfect, even “ideal” software tool on their allegedly “complete”, “rounded-up” “Macbook Pro”, “iPad” or whatever they can afford buying…

Thus: The Brits have The Queen’s suppliers from which they ideally buy; insecure computer users have got their “ideal machine”, and with Scrivener, with its “ideal front-end” on top, whatever their respective limitations (hardware, software, user) may be: We’re speaking of the IDEAL OBJECT here, and that can’t be criticized anymore, since it supplies Today’s Narcissist Society’s core: the Eternal Narc who just NEEDS - no discussion possible, ask’em! - the Ideal Object to bring’em over the day… but they constantly feel it’s not as ideal as that after all… and that’s why there’s

CRIMPING

for example, or then, replacing your “write projects”, within that “ideal machine”, one with the others - these, at the end of the day, consumptional strolls (replacing “production”) will come though, for your liver, with some comparative benefits, whilst the term “workstation” is at the opposite end of this notional axis, and could give you the chance to also consider some personal intervention into your further (wo)man/whoever-machine interactional activities, instead of assuming that any productional beauty lies in the original (and then turning out non-lasting anyway) choice.

Some professional, and really productive, authors (with readable handwriting or minimum two secretaries) always write by hand instead, and, as far as I know, with pencils and such, not with expensive, de luxe fountain pens; I suppose they get their inspiration from the unform of their scribbling, instead of satisfying themselves with the prettiness of form on screen - I’d be interested in hearing from any non-pulp novelist systematically using Scrivener, and I’d bet there’s none. (For that insane “littérature de gare”, David Hewson and his software blog come to mind, hahaha!)

Anyway, some interaction with the technicalities of your software could imitate, to some degree, I think, the immediate, traditional writing experience: the one that in some hands will produce classics, and bear in mind, originally “classic” had been a high-brow term, not an euphemism yet for old, obsolete, discounted (Apple) hardware; and then, the latter appears just short-term suitable for covert narcs anyway, will even physically make’em deeply suffer before long.

For the layperson: It’s about implication, engagement, instead of The Golden Child (cf. Ritchie 1986), and even On Golden Pond (Rydell 1981) makes you understand something about tried fetish incantation.

Yes, Apple’s Evil, and no wonder they sell to unsophisticated (sic!) brats even in gold (and in rosy, too), and with the above, I now consider the “Why’s Apple THAT successful?”, the CRIMPING, as well as all of serial divorce, problems being resolved… and besides, nothing’s new here, cf., among others, Erich Fromm 1976, and no, that’s not a movie for once.

And in my post’s title, “Stop”‘s the keyword, then. Now you give names, to prove me wrong… And oh yes, all the above is about the “original”, aberrant, third party’s idea of “Replacing Everything with ...”: Just developing a little bit, to prove my point… since there is no magic potion, and no magic black-box either that most of you seem to dream of though when they try to identify the notion of creating text, now that our original category “outline” has emerged as being totally unsatisfactory for all of us to get to the task, as 99 p.c. of current and recent posts here amply prove.