I could not quite get what you meant here. What is the reason and how does it apply to Scrivener?
Just curious.
One big reason Markdown apps and text processors have become popular is because they eliminate extraneous buttons and bars and functions, allowing you to focus on your writing. Word and Scrivener are old school, festooned with every possible option, and often multiple ways to perform some functions.
I know four professional writers who use Scrivener but confessed that they barely used a small fraction of its functionality, and didn’t even know all the features. They use the app but it’s too complicated.
Some people love geeky software with bells and whistles they’ll never use. May of them don’t know any other kind of app than something like Word.
One the other end is IA Writer, which until recently mandated you use only the embedded mono space font they chose with no Dark Mode. (Now you can choose from three fonts and two display modes.) It’s a very streamlined app and is designed to keep you from playing with settings and just write.
Somewhere between the two extremes is Ulysses, which has a dozen themes, editable themes you can share, the ability to use any font, etc. But it too does not have the sometimes overwhelming variety of functions and UI elements of word processors.
Earlier I just pointed out that Terpstra has had the habit of stuffing geeky functionality into apps that could have perhaps used a little more UI polish. I look forward to seeing nvultra when it’s released though.
3 Likes
I like that Obsidian, VS Code, Sublime, etc. have a command pallet that can be opened with a keystroke, then incrementally searched. This allows virtually unlimited functionality without having tabs and a million buttons on the interface.
1 Like
For me the issue is focus and simplicity because stuffing the Swiss Army functions behind a door still engenders complexity and complicatedness by devs. Some apps need to be complicated and packed with options, but those apps do not generally appeal to me.