News and Reviews > Mini-Reviews by Members

Comparative Review of Writers' Tools (INITIAL DRAFT)

<< < (23/24) > >>

Dormouse:
My ergonomic needs are usually uppermost (and that could probably be true for most users, were they but aware of it) and before I use/trial a new app. I invariably head for the options panel for application settings  - for view/fonts/background colours, etc.
For example:

* -IainB (2011-10-08, 23:05:53)


* Refer also: Re: Improving the ergonomic readability on laptop screen displays - Tips and Tricks.
- uses workaround for CHS as an example.
-IainB (August 22, 2016, 06:10 AM)
--- End quote ---
-IainB (December 17, 2018, 10:09 AM)
--- End quote ---
But that's for you. Makes no difference to me. Individual differences. That's the point.

wraith808:
My ergonomic needs are usually uppermost (and that could probably be true for most users, were they but aware of it) and before I use/trial a new app. I invariably head for the options panel for application settings  - for view/fonts/background colours, etc.
For example:

* -IainB (2011-10-08, 23:05:53)


* Refer also: Re: Improving the ergonomic readability on laptop screen displays - Tips and Tricks.
- uses workaround for CHS as an example.
-IainB (August 22, 2016, 06:10 AM)
--- End quote ---
-IainB (December 17, 2018, 10:09 AM)
--- End quote ---
But that's for you. Makes no difference to me. Individual differences. That's the point.

-Dormouse (December 17, 2018, 10:56 AM)
--- End quote ---

That's usually what it comes to in the end.  And assuming that your method is better than someone else's method is folly.  Just as different people learn in different fashions, different people process work in different fashions.  And there's nothing wrong with that.  Only with use do you tend to find out what's right for you.  Blindly following someone else's methodology is a good way to get frustrated quickly.

IainB:
@Dormouse:
...The trigger for me in starting this review was the irritation from years of reading reviews evaluating software, usually only a few at a time, by comparing feature lists &etc, but never finding these reviews helpful for my own use. ...
-Dormouse (December 17, 2018, 10:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yes, that seems to mirror my experience also.
Which is kinda why I wrote:
Experience indicates that failure to do this [URA] effectively will likely result in a now all-too-typical nebulous review of the sort that gets discussed at great length on sites such as OutLinerSoftware.com, for example (and DCF), ultimately apparently leading nowhere in particular.
-IainB (December 16, 2018, 07:36 AM)
--- End quote ---
However, I feel that I have already had at least some value from this discussion thread as it has prompted me to trial doogiePIM (out of curiosity), which I don't recall ever having come across before - or maybe I had done and had forgotten about it, though its name is not very forgettable.

Dormouse:
Individual differences. That's the point.-Dormouse (December 17, 2018, 10:56 AM)
--- End quote ---
That's usually what it comes to in the end.  And assuming that your method is better than someone else's method is folly.  Just as different people learn in different fashions, different people process work in different fashions.  And there's nothing wrong with that.  Only with use do you tend to find out what's right for you.  Blindly following someone else's methodology is a good way to get frustrated quickly.-wraith808 (December 17, 2018, 11:42 AM)
--- End quote ---
Agree completely.
My hope is that the review might give some people getting stuck ideas they may not otherwise have had. Or consider programs they might never have considered. And that those people might be outside the more common definitions of writers. There won't be a best program, or a worst. I will give ratings for different aspects, but they will be very (but hopefully not completely) subjective. although I hope there will be enough information for people to see where I'm coming from.

For myself the process so far has led to possible changes in workflow and programs. I had never really used WriteMonkey, yWriter or DoogiePIM before and I'd never considered using NoteZilla in the way I'm trialling now. I'm very pleased with that even if they don't stick.

ital2:
E.g. for RightNote: "Organisation: Multiple outlining options", and then, not so good for creative writing.

There a catch: You should not get to conclusions without mentioning the technical details which get you there.

For example, RN is one of those db-based 2-pane outliners which do NOT offer item / sub-tree cloning ("live" duplication, i.e. not copying, but replicating them to other branches); such critera are very important / decisive, so not mentioning them in part invalidates such, should I say "comparisons"?

Then, the "discussion" in this thread has become meandrous, as far as I'm concerned, but I'm ready to admit that even the original purpose of this thread would have been an impossible one, "writers' tools" being too much of a scope, since it would include any sorts of adjacent tools, too, whilst there's obviously not enough room left for the core applications, and even there, the core concepts ain't that much individualized.

(I've said it on the outliner forum recently, any text's striving, texts beyond say 1-page, and even that's debatable, should be for its optimized construction, that paradigm implying, of course, that in due course of optimizing construction, lacks in topic development should become evident, and should be handled, too.)

But whatever, the core problem with such tools is the fact that most characterists in them are implemented in a resolutely "me-too"-fashion, not taking account of writers' needs, so...

I'm not going to steal my, and yours, time, by dissecting, e.g., an application like "Final Draft", but you see, even the name of the "game", the application's name, indicates that it has never been devised for intermediate stages of writing, but in order to stay "competitive", they add all sorts of crap to it, making believe possible users that they could do construction work, too, with that application, which of course isn't true but to a really imagination-crippling degree, and as for quite another kind of writing, it's appalling of course that some application as UltraRecall isn't able to let you replace some term, "book"-wide, project-wide, sub-tree-wide, let alone file-wide, with some other.

And that's not even speaking of above-mentioned RN and other applications which are me-too from a to z.

Thus, any imaginable "comparison" is an elude in frustration, but that's not a reason for leaving out core criteria to begin with, I'd say.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page