Do you prefer Scrivener for iOS or Ulysses???

Be
BerlinKhan
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:15 pm
Platform: Mac

Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:51 am Post

I have both, and am using the free trial of Ulysses to test it out.

The biggest bonus of Ulysses over Scrivener I have found is the sync – I really don’t like the Dropbox syncing in the Srivener app, and it makes me feel like I can never trust it.

Scrivener feels like a coffee stained, post-it note covered binder in a leather armchair, while Ulysses feels like a sleek Apple-esque app, almost as if it is the official Apple Writing App. Both great in different ways.

One thing I’ve found interesting is that Ulysses is better when you have ALL your writing – from notes to journals to articles to books to references to quotes – in one place. Scrivener is project based, but despite that you could, if you wanted, use it in exactly the same way as Ulysses, with everything in one project. Do any of you use it that way?

User avatar
Silverdragon
Posts: 1140
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:52 pm
Platform: Mac + iOS
Location: Tarzana, California, USA
Contact:

Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:38 pm Post

I find my preference depends on what I'm writing. For fiction, I vastly prefer Scrivener. For short non-fiction articles (i. e., my blog) I prefer Ulysses. I don't do long-form nonfiction so I can't speak to it.

I loathe iCloud and use Ulysses with Dropbox. The sync is still smoother with Ulysses. But that doesn't deter me because since I became accustomed to Scrivener's rhythm, I've had no problems with sync.

I should note that most of my research is in Evernote, not Ulysses or Scrivener. I can't even imagine trying to keep research in Ulysses. Seriously, how would you do that? I depend on Evernote's ability to search (even my scribbled handwritten scanned notes) and find stuff that I've either misfiled or forgotten to classify. Therefore, my opinions on both Ulysses and Scrivener are coloured by the fact that I don't even try to keep my research and notes in the same application with my actual writing. I certainly can't speak to using Scrivener as a hold-everything notebook. Sorry.
So you know where I'm coming from:
  • I write fiction.
  • I'm not an L&L employee.
  • Mac Scrivener 3.1.3, MacBook Air 11, MacOS 10.14.6 (Mojave)
  • IOS Scrivener 1.2; iPhone 8 Plus, iOS 13.1.2; iPad 6th gen, iPadOS 13.1.2

User avatar
lunk
Posts: 3520
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:24 pm
Platform: Mac + iOS
Location: Sweden 64° N

Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:51 pm Post

I tried Ulysses and definitely do NOT want to have everything I’ve ever written cluttering the "project binder"
I am a user, writing non-fiction and science, using:
* Mac Scrivener 3 on a Macbook 12”, MacBook Pro 13”, and iMac 27”, all running the latest MacOS
* iOS Scrivener 1 on an iPhone 8, iPad Air 9.7”, and iPad Pro 12.9”, all running the latest iOS

Jo
Jordi Mora

Thu Aug 29, 2019 4:59 pm Post

BerlinKhan wrote:I have both, and am using the free trial of Ulysses to test it out.

The biggest bonus of Ulysses over Scrivener I have found is the sync – I really don’t like the Dropbox syncing in the Srivener app, and it makes me feel like I can never trust it.

Scrivener feels like a coffee stained, post-it note covered binder in a leather armchair, while Ulysses feels like a sleek Apple-esque app, almost as if it is the official Apple Writing App. Both great in different ways.

One thing I’ve found interesting is that Ulysses is better when you have ALL your writing – from notes to journals to articles to books to references to quotes – in one place. Scrivener is project based, but despite that you could, if you wanted, use it in exactly the same way as Ulysses, with everything in one project. Do any of you use it that way?


Like Lunk, I hate the idea of having all that I have in Scrivener in Ulysses, I don't see the attraction - (but then my project really sprawls and needs Tinderbox as a support service). But I have both, and use both pretty much daily, and I use them for the most part together.

I'm writing a large non-fiction historical project and I mainly use Ulysses for the 'pure' writing, when I'm exploring ideas (an essay a day ...) - and then use Scrivener for putting those ideas into place as part of the larger form. For iOS writing I use a Canopy stand and an Apple bluetooth keyboard, and I find writing in Ulysses in fullscreen to be pretty close to an old typewriter experience.

The difference in the writing experience between the two is less marked in the Mac versions - Scrivener can be just as frictionless as Ulysses on an iMac - but I'm not so keen on writing much in Scrivener iOS because it feels cramped and less flexible. I don't use any writing software that has a fixed-width editor - line width is a hugely important factor for both reading and writing comprehension - and I work far less well with iOS Scrivener's limited choices.

User avatar
kewms
Posts: 5243
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac

Thu Aug 29, 2019 6:12 pm Post

Personally, my feeling is that if you want *all* of your writing in one place, you probably have a much tighter focus than I do. At any given moment, I might have four or five different projects, both fiction and non-fiction, in various stages of completion. Even thinking of trying to manage all of that in one bucket gives me cold pricklies.

Katherine
Scrivener Support Team

de
derick
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:58 pm

Thu Aug 29, 2019 8:06 pm Post

I use Ulysses as a note repository, with about 1.2 million words and still blazing fast search and iCloud sync, and a global keyword system. Document creation and tagging can be handled through a URL scheme that works the same on iOS and MacOS.

I rarely write documents of more than a few paragraphs in it, though, because I find Scrivener handles complex structure so much more easily. Any real writing I move into Scrivener. But I also rarely if ever use the Research aspects of Scrivener - anything I’m using for research should be in its own location, not mixed up in an ephemeral project.

br
brett
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:17 am
Location: yet another Portlander

Fri Aug 30, 2019 2:07 am Post

I’ve tried the Ulysses free trial a few times, most recently a year or so ago, simply because so many writers rave about it, and the aesthetic is really attractive. I’m sure it’s great for many writers, particularly those who deal entirely in plain text and publish straight to a blog. But every time I try it (and I realize it’s being updated often, no doubt thanks to the cash flow generated by subscription model), I come away thinking it doesn’t suit my needs.

If I need simple, beautiful plain text writing for a short piece or anything that doesn’t require structural organization, I use iA Writer, which is much cheaper , just as elegant, and doesn’t pack all my writing into a single basket. BTW, there are other posts on this forum about how to make your Scrivener project look more like Ulysses.

If I need structured writing, Scrivener is at least as useful to me as Ulysses, though I agree the iOS app isn’t quite as smooth. Since I still use my Mac for big projects like books, it’s not a problem. Plus, Scrivener allows me to import pdfs and other reference material into a project, which for me usually works better than putting the reference material and my writing in two different apps side by side, though that’s doable if necessary. And I agree with the other advantages of Scrivener listed here in earlier posts, particularly its project-based approach, which is really ideal for my work.

If I need other functions in working with other writers and editors, like dealing with Word files, editing, etc., I use Pages or Google Docs, which are both free. Yes, I’d love to have one writing app that would rule them all, but I’ve pretty much given up on that fantasy just because as a journalist, bookwriter, and playwright, I have so many different needs, and better to use the best tool for each job. (I have the same philosophy with keyboards and iPad, which is why I have one of the latter but three of the former, but that’s a different post....)

However, I’d love to hear from Scriveners here who use Ulysses what unique features the latter has that Scrivener might consider adopting as well. I realize non Dropbox syncing must await changes in iCloud (Scrivener is one of the only reasons I keep my free Dropbox account), but what else does Ulysses have that Scrivener doesn’t — and should?

Oh, and let’s not forget the other advantages of Scrivener — like responsive developers and supportive forum user community!

Jo
Jordi Mora

Fri Aug 30, 2019 11:03 am Post

brett wrote:what else does Ulysses have that Scrivener doesn’t — and should?


Answer to the first part of the question - probably a fair bit; second part - nothing.

I've used Ulysses since very much earlier versions (from which Scrivener admittedly took some inspiration) and at some point decisions were made by both developers to take their creations in particular directions which broadened the gap between them. So we now have the familiar, and perfectly acceptable, horses for courses scenario ...

I like in a rural area and so have a Land Rover for my four dogs and the property groundwork; I also have an ancient Audi estate for shopping trips and the occasional longer journey. There is some cross-over use, but I see no point in wishing one was more like the other.

Ra
Rayz
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:43 pm
Platform: Mac

Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:15 am Post

However, I’d love to hear from Scriveners here who use Ulysses what unique features the latter has that Scrivener might consider adopting as well. I realize non Dropbox syncing must await changes in iCloud (Scrivener is one of the only reasons I keep my free Dropbox account), but what else does Ulysses have that Scrivener doesn’t — and should?


Not sure there is anything that Scrivener can adopt, aside from the seamless syncing, which is unlikely to happen. I switched to Ulysses for my next book, since I’m travelling more and finding syncing with Scrivener somewhat problematic. The iCloud syncing on Ulysses works so well that I can type on Ulysses/iPad Pro/iPhone and watch the text appear on Ulysses/Mac. The longest delay I’ve seen is about two minutes, so I can get the phone out while I’m on the train and just crack on without having to worry that I’m up to date. Your mileage may vary,

For me, there’s not much in it between them for every day use. I’ve become a huge fan of Markdown since the switch, but Scrivener can do Markdown too, so …
Ulysses feels incredibly light weight, so is a joy to work with, now that I’m spending so much time in it, but there are trade-offs: no chapter numbering support, minimal support for making use of meta data, and I think it’s easier to set up compilation in Scrivener (desktop). In fact, it’s pretty much just a text editor while Scrivener is like a writer’s studio. One is not necessarily better than the other, it just depends on what you’re looking for.

Rather than looking for one tool that does everything, I now look for a couple of tools that do one or two thing really well, and just link them together. Aeon Timeline for planning, Scrivener for keeping research notes, Ulysses for writing, Vellum for final output.
As if I didn't talk enough: Dom on Writing

de
derick
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:58 pm

Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:09 am Post

what else does Ulysses have that Scrivener doesn’t — and should?


Basic automation capabilities - creating new documents, retrieving content & links, etc. As requested for Scrivener ca. 2007. viewtopic.php?t=1921 and nine years later viewtopic.php?t=34852

Mi
MikeGardiner
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:23 pm
Platform: Mac

Mon Sep 02, 2019 10:10 am Post

I picked up Ulysses a few months ago, and I have to say I'm really liking it. I'm currently using it for holding everything that's not a novel - random ideas split across genres, more fleshed out ideas for my next novels, a collection of writing guides, marketing notes and strategies, website and blog posts etc.

I love the seamless sync and feature parity across devices. It feels simple and slick to use. It exports much nicer to Vellum (which I've never been able to do from Scrivener without heaps of re-work in Vellum).

I still go into Scrivener to write the actual novel though, and I'm not sold in whether I could manage a whole book in Ulysses the way I like to write (every document is a scene with some pretty heavy chapter and metadata management). I might try it for my next novel, but I have a feeling I'll be running back to familiar Scrivener-land before I'm done.

Overall very pleased with Ulysses and see it as a supplementary app rather than any sort of replacement - both are great and both have their place.

User avatar
slpwlkr
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:28 pm
Platform: Mac, Win + iOS

Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:39 am Post

kewms wrote:Even thinking of trying to manage all of that in one bucket gives me cold pricklies.

Initially misread this as “gives me cold pickles”, which is now my new favorite phrase.

As for Scrivener vs Odysseus - my advice would be to keep your personalities as unaware of each other as you can.
all your sanity
and wits
they will all
vanish
I promise
it's just a
matter of time

 

 
https://www.literatureandlatte.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=58404&p=297229
www.literatureandlatte.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-43
54076
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:MHSUIGDBK3TO4K33PGHRMQY3SZCOZNQL
<urn:uuid:1bef01c6-57fb-430a-ac44-e09814ddbcf5>
2019-10-14T06:26:09Z
69.163.177.169
text/html
sha1:WA36OZ6CYT4ZWVZPQZCYUGAVCFLMNIDX
<urn:uuid:14ebe2a3-3156-4760-953c-ed6cc62c5974>
https://www.literatureandlatte.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=58404&p=297229
response
<urn:uuid:7f8c3639-3e82-4ec7-9a2d-0deab9c31dcf>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-43
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-193.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/