I pulled out the MacBook Pro for the first time in months yesterday and downloaded the new Scrivener 2.0. I can't pretend this is in any way a review. Scrivener is a substantial piece of software and deserves that from someone who's going to spend a lot of time doing serious work inside it. That won't be me -- my Mac days are past.

But here are a few initial observations. I ought to be more familiar with Scrivener 2 than I am in truth because I started using the beta as a tester something like two years ago if I recall (which is why some of the Scrivener screenshots here puzzled people a bit).

<!--more-->Frankly it's so long since I used Scrivener 1 (which wasn't even 1.5 then) that I really don't remember what that was like. The release Scrivener 2 is a bit of a stranger too and doesn't bear a very close resemblance to the beta I worked with either. It's cleaner, smarter, nicer to look at.

Firing up Scrivener for the first time in six months or so reminded me why I like this software so much. It really does work the way I think about writing, allowing me to see the <a href="http://davidhewson.com/2009/10/08/scrivener-and-the-mosaic-of-writing/" target="_blank">story mosaic</a>, move around scenes and parts, label them and <a href="http://davidhewson.com/2009/09/09/the-best-scrivener-tip-ever-maybe/" target="_blank">think about them outside the actual narrative. </a>Nothing I've ever seen comes close to Scrivener in this respect.

Does Version 2 add much to these fundamental features? In a way, not that they needed much expansion. For me it's basically a much cleaner, better organised and more easily understood introduction to the software. A fair number of people I've pointed towards Scrivener 1 have come back to me and said, 'I just don't get it.' It does look a bit daunting at first sight. Lots of options, boxes, labels things to tick if you allow everything to be on show (which you don't have to).

Version 2.0 looks a lot more friendly. Here's how next year's book,  <em>The Fallen Angel, </em>looks (it was written entirely in the beta).

<a href="http://davidhewson.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/screen-shot-2010-11-03-at-08-58-53.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-6090 alignnone" title="Scrivener 2" src="http://davidhewson.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/screen-shot-2010-11-03-at-08-58-53.png" alt="" width="490" height="327" /></a>

There are some wonderfully subtle additions. I love the new comments feature which is both powerful yet does not intrude on the text. There's a fantastic manual (though parts seem unfinished) to introduce you to the concepts of Scrivener's various parts. The outliner and corkboard make a lot more sense. Scrivener 1 was a clever piece of one-man shareware. This looks like the product of a sophisticated software company with a firm direction of where it's headed (though in truth it's still a small software company).

There are still things in there I would never use. I don't really understand how I'd need the new collections feature, the scriptwriting tools or the roundabout way you can get Scrivener documents onto an iPad to see them in Simplenote. The latter would worry me frankly. I am version-averse. I hate the idea of different copies of the same document floating around (cf the recent Franzen experience).

(<em>Update -- </em>Scrivener can also export to .mobi which can with a tweak be read by Kindle too -- so the caveats here aren't really accurate). The ability to export in epub format for an ereader sounded very exciting when I first heard about it in confidence ages ago. But that was when epub-based readers such as the Sony seemed fashionable. Now Kindle seems to rule the roost and that epub file really only makes sense if you have an iPad (iBooks will read it, though you won't be able to export any comments you make there). The coming field of Android tablets will be epub friendly though so perhaps that will make this feature look a little more useful. I wish I could say there was a good way of revising manuscripts on a tablet -- marking them up with notes and changes -- but for the life of me I still haven't found it.

Some of the things Scrivener can do seem to me to be bordering on the obsessive. I'm sure there are writers who need to cross reference different parts of their manuscript to other chapters and scenes and websites. But I doubt most of us do. The temptation for newcomers with all software is to try to learn it all in one go. I'd strongly advise against this with Scrivener. It's a very comprehensive writer's toolbox. Few of us will need every gadget beneath the lid.

So pick the things you like, master them, and forget the others. This is writing software. Clever as it is -- and it's very smart indeed -- it's the writing that matters.

Another reminder -- you can browse my earlier Scrivener articles t<a href="http://davidhewson.com/tag/scrivener/" target="_blank">hrough this link. </a>

Oh, and as I write the Scrivener site is unfortunately down due to the demand interest in Scrivener 2 has placed on its servers. A kind of compliment to Scrivener's developer Keith, not that I imagine he sees it that way at the moment. When it's back you will find Scrivener 2.0, and a free 30-day trial, <a href="http://www.literatureandlatte.com/scrivener.php" target="_blank">here.</a>

I really like the look of it. But, before you ask, not enough to go back to the Mac. If Microsoft had included a version of OneNote in its new Mac Office though... but they didn't.

<em>Update. </em>Dammit! I've just worked out how that Collections thing could be used and it's brilliant. Double dammit! The logical way to replace OneNote is to have a separate Scrivener document for research.