# Writing Software



## Kevan (Nov 9, 2010)

You probably thought this was a thread asking what the best writing software is, but you would be wrong in that assumption. For the last month I have been trying to find actual writing software. You know the kind that will allow me to write my story well keeping notes without using side software like notepad, saving in a different document, wasting time with so called writing software, or wasting money on binder paper and notebooks.

  Now ever writer may like what software is out there well others prefer a more old school approach like a simple notebook or 3x5 cards. But let’s face it this is 2010 and you think someone would have create actual writing software that does as the name depicts it to be. In fact I am not sure why most writing software is even called writing software as it’s more like organizing software. 

  You see when I think of writing software I think of something like Microsoft Office or Microsoft Works (my preferred word processor), but it has extra stuff to allow me to take notes, keep track of characters, towns/cities, etc. So this means that the software is a TRUE word processor, but has features a writer needs.

  Looking at what is out there most if not all fail at this simple task and are organizers not actual writing software. Let’s break it down by giving some examples.

*Dramatica Pro*

  Besides this costing $265.95 it lacks TWO of the most used features found in a word processor: word count and spell check. Plus if you were expecting this to be a word processor with extra writing features for writers you are sadly mistaken. It says it has a word processor, but it is not used like a writer would use say Microsoft Works word processor. This is nothing but a gloated organizer and nothing more.

*Write Way*

  Will cost you $59.00 and though it has a word count and spell checker again it is just another gloated Dramatica Pro only cheaper. It says it has a word processor, but need I mention again what these are already?

*Story Weaver*

  $29.95 and guess what it lacks spell checker, word count, and even the fake word processor. A gloated organizer claiming it is writing software.

*yWriter*

  Now yes this is free, but it is claimed to be made by a writer for writers? I downloaded this and messed with it and by the time I was done testing it out it turns out that this software was clearly NOT created by a writer for writers. It is basically a free down sized version of Dramatica Pro, Write Way, and many others. Furthermore I’m not sure if I should be insulted because it is free or that a writer claimed to have made it. How the hell does a writer screw this up?

-----------------------------------​ 
  When I think of writing software I think of something that:

  When I click NEW it asks me what I am going to create: novel, short story, novella, screenplay, comic book script, teleplay, poem, non-fiction, how to guide, magazine article, web article, blog article, etc.

  Now from this the software will pre-format the page to the standard format used by most publishers. Plus it will auto hide stuff I don’t need; so for example if I want to create a magazine article I don’t need to see a character section for example!

  Plus in this beginning part if I was creating a novel it will ask what genre the book will or might fall into. So if I pick Fantasy I will be presented with the actual Word Processor and a verity of TABS for keeping track of characters, main events, cities, etc.

  That is what I think writing software is when I think of it and those who claim to be fail at providing this!

*So what do you think they are lacking or what is your vision of writing software?*


----------



## Lamperoux (Nov 9, 2010)

i find one's that organize well, but then can't offer spell check, or an auto tab. 

i prefer microsoft word. 

hear me out...
i only need to get my spelling right, that's it, so why bother using anything different.


----------



## garza (Nov 9, 2010)

Everyone around here knows by now what my answer will be, but I see you are new, so I'll say it again.

When I'm writing I want nothing from the computer except a willingness to sit there quietly and let me put one word after another. I want a blank piece of electronic paper. I do not want a word processor or a writing programme or anything else that will get in between me and that blank piece of paper. 

Everything I write, I write with Notepad unless I happen to be on a Linux machine in which case I use Vim. I can have my outline sitting down in the corner. I can have my background notes on the other side. I can have reference material in three or four windows open but stacked so I can get at whichever one I want when I want it without having to go and search for it. And I can have that blank piece of electronic paper sitting in the midst of all of this where I can put one word after another with no interference from the machine. Or if I'm writing a commentary or a personal essay I can have only that blank piece of electronic paper in front of me. 

When I've finished writing I copy and paste into a word processor to spell check and to format. That's what word processors do very well. 

If you ever try using a text editor instead of a word processor to write, you'll discover just how powerful a writing tool a computer can be.

Edit - Notepad is also the best html editor I've found, if you are into building web pages.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 9, 2010)

Lamperoux said:


> hear me out...
> i only need to get my spelling right, that's it, so why bother using anything different.



Some people need more and may not want to spend money on notebooks and 3x5 cards. Some genre's require more thinking and constructing; world building. My main complaint is that they call them writing software when they are writing note/organizing software. Plus who me a software that can display and point out this error:

"_Matt wood have fed the pigs, but he got stuck chopping would most of the day_"

Word processors lack this find and yes the writer could reread his work to catch the mistake or have others read it to catch it; even catch it during the revision. But being a programmer as well it would not be hard to have a word processor be able to notice and point the mistake out.



garza said:


> Everyone around here knows by now what my answer will be, but I see you are new, so I'll say it again.
> 
> When  I'm writing I want nothing from the computer except a willingness to  sit there quietly and let me put one word after another. I want a blank  piece of electronic paper. I do not want a word processor or a writing  programme or anything else that will get in between me and that blank  piece of paper.
> 
> ...


 
Yes I have read your replies, but this type of software is geared toward those who don't wish to buy notebooks everytime or have 5 or more other useless programs open at the same time. Plus you have to save each one in a diffrent file well such software will save it in one file. As I said every person has their own uses and reasons for those uses.


----------



## garza (Nov 9, 2010)

I think you misunderstand, but that's okay. Most people don't like Notepad simply because it comes bundled with Windows and so is automatically bad.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 9, 2010)

garza said:


> I think you misunderstand, but that's okay. Most people don't like Notepad simply because it comes bundled with Windows and so is automatically bad.



I understood, "you simple want no distractions." Which is also understandable. I personally find Notepad useless and always uninstall it. I prefer a word processor as I don't find it distracting in any way. I barley take notice of what it is doing, marked incorrect. Like reading when I'm writing I am in my own world.


----------



## garza (Nov 9, 2010)

Well, truly, to each his own. I've sold four books and lord knows how many magazine articles written with Notepad, and today I earn a few extra dollars putting together websites with Notepad, so for me it's not useless. Just don't waste your writing time looking for that perfect writing software that probably dosen't exist.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 9, 2010)

garza said:


> Well, truly, to each his own. I've sold four books and lord knows how many magazine articles written with Notepad, and today I earn a few extra dollars putting together websites with Notepad, so for me it's not useless.



Well being a webmaster and web developer for 13 years and software developer for 6 years notepad by web developers and software developers do not use it. Preferred method is Dreamweaver, HTML Kit, Visual Studios, etc. But like you said to each their own.



garza said:


> Just don't waste your writing time looking  for that perfect writing software that probably doesn't exist.



Actually I'm not. I don't take notes except in my head; every writer is different as we both have said. I'm also a software developer so I made this topic to get other peoples opinion and posted my own opinion as a writer.


----------



## garza (Nov 9, 2010)

So let me ask your opinion on something. I have Microsoft Office 2003 and 2007. I mostly use Word 2003 for formatting. I'm thinking of getting Office 2010. Do you have it, and is it worth the price?

I'm too old to learn those complicated programmes like Dreamweaver. I'll stick with html, Java, Perl, and such. I know how to use them to do what I want to do and the clients are happy.


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 15, 2010)

*Try this....*

Liquid Story Binder v4.81 I think it is. I have 7 books sitting in this prog right now. I was looking for just about everything you cited in the original post and then I stumbled across LSBXE. It takes a bit of getting used to, but I'm pretty satisfied with it. It's addictive actually. You can integrate web dictionaries/thesauruses, do spell-check, ready your docs for submissions, import images, use those images in sequences, dossiers or galleries, you can import songs, you can record yourself reading out loud . . . . Really, the possibilities are ridiculous and LSBXE does too much to list here. I'd planned on blogging about it very soon. If this sounds like what you need Google their site. See what you think. I believe it's by Black Obelisk. 


Kaia


----------



## KrisMunro (Nov 15, 2010)

Seems like everyone's a web designer these days.  
Yes, me too - I use dreamweaver (and love it).

With writing software, I use yWriter. I've really no idea how you've lumped this software with Dramatica Pro (which I've used and discarded).

yWriter handles nearly everything that the LSBXE does: Can integrate dictionaries/thesaurus, organise stories into chapters and scenes, set up characters, locations, notes, and other items. It accepts images, and will export your work. It has a spell checker, word could, progress log, daily word log, and other charts that can be set up to display the content and scenes your characters are in. It will even read your work to you.

It's essentially a program that collates txt files into an organised format for you. Which is what I want out of a writing program.


On a side note.. some comments in here explain a dissatisfaction with programs not correcting grammar. And I've something of an easy solution for you:

The earlier versions of MS Word do correct grammar as well as spelling. The earliest of them will even detail what the error is and suggest methods of fixing it; even reordering your words.



My advice is to use yWriter for your writing, and get your hands on a copy of word 95 or 97. And get ready for grammar errors like 'written in passive voice' (my favourite...).


----------



## Lamperoux (Nov 16, 2010)

Kevan said:


> Some people need more and may not want to spend money on notebooks and 3x5 cards. Some genre's require more thinking and constructing; world building. My main complaint is that they call them writing software when they are writing note/organizing software. Plus who me a software that can display and point out this error:
> 
> "_Matt wood have fed the pigs, but he got stuck chopping would most of the day_"
> 
> ...


 you insinuate that i don't write complex stories. I write very complex tales. I don't need a computer to restrict my imagination though.  I do admire garza's old-fashion style. You have to realize every writer in the world before the invention of these softwares only a few years ago was created in the 90s had to go without organizing their work on a software like we can today. and somehow, they have managed to make so many great books. There  is no need for something to organize your thoughts for you.


----------



## Lamperoux (Nov 16, 2010)

garza said:


> So let me ask your opinion on something. I have Microsoft Office 2003 and 2007. I mostly use Word 2003 for formatting. I'm thinking of getting Office 2010. Do you have it, and is it worth the price?
> 
> I'm too old to learn those complicated programmes like Dreamweaver. I'll stick with html, Java, Perl, and such. I know how to use them to do what I want to do and the clients are happy.


 
2010 is nice, but you don't need to get it, it's not amazingly different in my opinion. I got it cuz i'm a computer geek .


----------



## Lamperoux (Nov 16, 2010)

lullabyofthemoths said:


> Liquid Story Binder v4.81 I think it is. I have 7 books sitting in this prog right now. I was looking for just about everything you cited in the original post and then I stumbled across LSBXE. It takes a bit of getting used to, but I'm pretty satisfied with it. It's addictive actually. You can integrate web dictionaries/thesauruses, do spell-check, ready your docs for submissions, import images, use those images in sequences, dossiers or galleries, you can import songs, you can record yourself reading out loud . . . . Really, the possibilities are ridiculous and LSBXE does too much to list here. I'd planned on blogging about it very soon. If this sounds like what you need Google their site. See what you think. I believe it's by Black Obelisk.
> 
> 
> Kaia


 
it doesn't auto-indent does it? For a writer with a lot of dialogue, it's a big problem.


----------



## Cambyses (Nov 16, 2010)

garza said:


> Edit - Notepad is also the best html editor I've found, if you are into building web pages.


I cannot imagine trying to write code without syntax highlighting, code debugging, line numbers, and the ability to "find" phrases in your code.  That's why I use Notepad++.  Though I suppose I could deal with writing HTML in Notepad because of its structural simplicity.  That would still bug me.

As to writing, I usually save my characters, plot outline, etc. in different Word (2007) files and have them all open as I write.  I personally have never seen a need to invest in "writing" software to help me organize my thoughts.


----------



## KrisMunro (Nov 16, 2010)

Lamperoux said:


> You have to realize every writer in the world before the invention of  these softwares only a few years ago was created in the 90s had to go  without organizing their work on a software like we can today ... There  is no need for something to organize your thoughts for you.


And a great many years before that, they carved their words into clay. Yet somehow we evolved into new and better ways of writing.

Sometimes I wonder whether there's some inherent reluctance to utilise new tools. We have people in here saying 'notepad is the best html editor they've found' but posts later saying they've not tried dreamweaver. 

Maybe it's an unwillingness to change.. I don't know. I'm not about to decide your motives for you.

But what I don't like is the concept that because something suffices, or it's been done a certain way by successful people, that it's the better way to do things. I'm sure some people could arrange magnetic letters or a fridge, and produce a masterpiece. But that doesn't mean it's a good way for everyone, nor that it should be argued as the best way.

I often find that people advocating 'old' methods, are usually the same ones who don't want to try new ones themselves. They don't want to see what else is out there, and they try to convince other people that what's out there is unnecessary.

My question is 'why?'.. why deny advances in technology? Why try to convince other people to avoid utilising them? How is this stance a good one?


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 16, 2010)

*It does*



Lamperoux said:


> it doesn't auto-indent does it? For a writer with a lot of dialogue, it's a big problem.




It does but you need to tell it to. Or you can wait til you're done with everything and do all your formatting at the end. That's a good question, one I'll have to address in the blog I'm working on.


----------



## garza (Nov 16, 2010)

I've tried Dreamweaver several times, each time there is a major upgrade. It just gets in the way of what I'm trying to do. I'll probably try it again in the future. Hope springs eternal, and all that.

Who is denying advances in technology? That's a different animal altogether from the software running with that technology. I upgrade the technology I use every year. Computers, scanners, printers, cameras*, are retired when I find anything newer that will work better, faster, or more reliably. I've been doing that since the late 70s. When it comes to hardware I am, in fact, a bit of a technology freak. 

I switched from typewriter to computer for some of my writing in the 60s when I had access for about six months to an IBM business system. I learned Cobol and used that knowledge to write magazine articles about the coming revolution in information processing. When I went back to the bush I went back to pencil and notepad - no computers in the jungle. 

_I use whatever is the best that is available wherever I am._ 

I have tried all the writing software that I've seen recommended. After fair trials I've found none of it to be of any practical value for me. All such programmes just get in the way of writing. 

I'm not a cripple. I don't need a crutch. I'm a writer. The software I need is in my head. All I need in front of me is a way of putting one word after another. I've made a good living doing that for 56 years. Some people have a problem with that. I'm sorry.

*Edit - I do continue to rely heavily on my old Canon EOS D60 because I have a good collection of Canon lenses for it. But I also have recently invested in two of the new generation of pocket cameras that do quite a decent job.


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 16, 2010)

KrisMunro said:


> I often find that people advocating 'old' methods, are usually the same ones who don't want to try new ones themselves. They don't want to see what else is out there, and they try to convince other people that what's out there is unnecessary.
> 
> My question is 'why?'.. why deny advances in technology? Why try to convince other people to avoid utilising them? How is this stance a good one?


 

Perhaps these are the same people who deny help when it's offered, or who prefer 8-tracks to Ipods.


----------



## KrisMunro (Nov 16, 2010)

I hope I didn't offend/upset you Garza. I'm not arguing against you (or anyone) using what works for them. Just the insistence by them that other people shouldn't need or use technology.

My post reflected on your comments, but they weren't directed at you specifically.


----------



## Kat (Nov 16, 2010)

I'm broke so I generally use Open Office writer. There are some extensions and templates for writing although I haven't tried any of them before. 

I would like a timeline feature, so that I can set each chapter along a time line. That would be helpful for flashbacks and premonitions, things that don't follow a regular timeline.


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 16, 2010)

garza said:


> Who is denying advances in technology?


 
This seems to have gotten off-topic from the original post where Kevan wanted to know specifically which writing software actually fell under the category of writing software and not word processing, etc.... That's what I was responding to


----------



## KrisMunro (Nov 16, 2010)

yWriter has a feature that allows you to include a time (in days, hours, minutes), but I'm not sure if it's what you're after. It's just a basic, feature that lets you select a time frame for the chapter. Eg, I set my first chapter at day 0, hour 6, minute 0. Which tells me it's 6:00 in the morning on the first day. Another section lets you set a similar field for how long the chapter lasts. The next chapter may be day 2, hour 10, minute 0 and last for 2 days and 6 hours.

I'm not sure how you'd use it for flashbacks that go beyond the start of your story... 
It doesn't display a chart/timeline depicting the scene position and lengths.


----------



## garza (Nov 18, 2010)

lullabyofthemoths - In the earliest days of writing there were no doubt those who preferred limestone for the ease with which it could be carved, and others who insisted that only slate would do. Today the argument continues over what is the best system for writing, and maybe some confusion over which is what. 

There is the straight text editor which is where it all started. I first learned to write to a computer using a Texas Instruments Silent 700 in the 60s with a basic IBM text editor. With the introduction of the personal computer the early text editors evolved into slightly more sophisticated applications such as Notepad in Windows and Vi in Unix or Linux. The text editor give you what amounts to a blank piece of paper and lets you type on it. It offers no help, but also offers no obstructions.

As the personal computer developed there came the word processor. A good, very basic, word processor is Windows WordPad. But computer users demanded more, including the ability not only to format text but to add graphics, tables, multi-column layouts. They wanted the computer to provide such services as spell check and word count. Each word processor generation has brought more capability, but often more frustration for those who do not fully understand all the controls available with the application. I use Word 2003 and Word 2007 to be able to format text, create tables, add drawings and photos, and such. They are great apps for certain uses and I have studied them enough to take full advantage of their abilities. 

The WF Newsletter is produced using Word 2003. I edit all the text using Notepad because it's easier, then go to Word to format the text and assemble the pages, adding any associated graphics to the text.

Then there are the apps that bill themselves as writing software. They have evolved from word processors with added abilities to organise the writer's material. For many people such software is useful. For others it's a time-consuming hindrance that slows the actual writing process. 

My objection to the apps that bill themselves as writing software is the implied assurance from some of them that they can turn a non-writer into a writer. That will not happen. The ability to write does not come from a piece of software. The ability to write begins with a desire to write followed by years of effort. There is no easy shortcut. The one who would write must read, study, and practise writing daily. Plugging a vague idea into a computer programme will not create a blockbuster novel, but that is the implication I see in much of the promotional material for such software. 

Cambyses - I have just downloaded the latest version of Notepad++, looked it over, and will give it a try. I can see how it might be useful.

Devan - I don't know if any of this helps, but my one unending piece of advice is, don't spend your money unless you are sure you will get your money's worth. 

KrisMunro - Please forgive my sarcastic reference to Dreamweaver. I understand it to be a WYSIWYG app, which seems like a slow and clumsy way of putting a web page together, but you say you love it, so it must be okay.


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 18, 2010)

garza said:


> Then there are the apps that bill themselves as writing software. They have evolved from word processors with added abilities to organise the writer's material. For many people such software is useful. For others it's a time-consuming hindrance that slows the actual writing process.
> 
> My objection to the apps that bill themselves as writing software is the implied assurance from some of them that they can turn a non-writer into a writer. That will not happen. The ability to write does not come from a piece of software. The ability to write begins with a desire to write followed by years of effort. There is no easy shortcut. The one who would write must read, study, and practise writing daily. Plugging a vague idea into a computer programme will not create a blockbuster novel, but that is the implication I see in much of the promotional material for such software.


 
Hi garza, 

That's absolutely brilliant. Really, I couldn't have put it better. Your response has a great deal in common with Kevan's original post. He asked if anyone knew of a program that wasn't just an overdressed word processor; not if anyone knew of a program that would do the writing for him. I don't believe any writers' software can do that.    

Agreed -- there's no shortcut to good writing. But good writing can be achieved more readily with advances in software, and it _is_ human nature to want to advance. Writers' software taps into that nature. Look at what Shakespeare managed with pen and paper. If he'd owned a text editor I think our concept of a 'prolific writer' would be a little different today wouldn't it?


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 18, 2010)

Kat said:


> I would like a timeline feature, so that I can set each chapter along a time line. That would be helpful for flashbacks and premonitions, things that don't follow a regular timeline.


 
Awesome point, Kat, thanks for posting it. I addressed it in my blog.


----------



## garza (Nov 18, 2010)

lullabyofthemoths - If you really want the short answer to Kevan's question, it's no. All writing programmes are derivative and if you can access their source code you will see that they are all mutations of word processors which, in turn, are expanded text editors. This is not to say they are useless. If a programme such as ywriter helps you, use it.


----------



## KrisMunro (Nov 18, 2010)

I think I've got a better idea of what most of you are saying about 'writing software'. I never really considered them as 'software that writes for you', and have always seen them as 'software that allows you to write'. Semantics...

When reading back, it's more clear what people are meaning when they say, 'no software does what it claims'. I'm thinking that any software that prompted users in their writing, or made suggestions, alterations, etc, could essentially ruin writing. Any two-bit novice could string together a piece of quality work.. which would mean a flood of works of too-similar writing styles. It runs the risk of stagnating writing; creating an expected standard that people become restricted to.

Mind... in these comments, I'm considering a true 'writing software' that became as popular and well used as Word.


----------



## MJ Preston (Nov 18, 2010)

I started with notebooks and a pen, thumped away on an old Underwood Manual, moved up to an Ollivetti Electric, bought a Brother Word Processor LCD in the 80's and along came computers. 

I don't miss Liquid Paper, typewriter ribbon or hand cramps one bit. I like Microsoft Word, it suits my needs just fine, but as Kat mentioned there is Open Office which I just downloaded because it has the ability to convert word docs to PDF and it is my intent to have a completed e-book once I start submitting my manuscript.

As for a program that plans and writes for you, no thanks.

Although, I'd give my left arm (not really) if someone could point me to a decent open source downloadable dictionary.


----------



## garza (Nov 18, 2010)

I've found an example of the sort of thing guaranteed to suck money out of the pockets of wannabe writers who do not want to put in the time or effort needed to learn the craft. It's called 'Instant Article' and it promises to write articles for you on any subject. Just tell it what you want to write about, it searches the Internet, finds articles on the subject, and apparently pastes up bits and pieces so all you have to do is a little copy editing and you have an article ready to publish. Let the computer do all that boring research while you sit back and rake in the cash.

When he was in his late teens, just off the boat from Ireland and newly settled in Mississippi, my grandfather worked for a couple of years as a mule skinner. That's the fellow with a 20 foot whip he uses to persuade a team of mules to take their work seriously. I've heard him tell how the bite of just the tip of that whip would convince the most recalcitrant member of the team to pull with renewed spirit, and how the same sting could be used to convince a confidence trickster to move on to another county. I'm not suggesting anything, just sayin...


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 18, 2010)

KrisMunro said:


> I'm thinking that any software that prompted users in their writing, or made suggestions, alterations, etc, could essentially ruin writing. Any two-bit novice could string together a piece of quality work.. which would mean a flood of works of too-similar writing styles. It runs the risk of stagnating writing; creating an expected standard that people become restricted to.
> .



Another good point. Unfortunately, the market already looks that way and it has little to do with writers' software, but reader demands....


----------



## lullabyofthemoths (Nov 19, 2010)

garza said:


> lullabyofthemoths - If you really want the short answer to Kevan's question, it's no. All writing programmes are derivative and if you can access their source code you will see that they are all mutations of word processors which, in turn, are expanded text editors. This is not to say they are useless. If a programme such as ywriter helps you, use it.



Ok, garza. That's like saying 'well Windows XP is a derivative of Windows Millennium, which is a derivative of Windows 95, which is a derivative of Windows 3.x, and since derivatives are . . . derivative, I'm sticking with Windows 3.x . . . but if XP helps you then by all means use it.' :scratch: 

We're all derivative. Our DNA is derivative. The automobile is derivative of the horse-drawn carriage. What's your point? I don't use dated technology out of 'principles'. 

You are right that all writing programs are derivative -- of course they are, they're all built off the same platform and are for the same purpose -- but I'm not sure why that's a good selling point for Notepad. Notepad's not even a word processor, it's a text editor. There's a difference.

Also, I'm not sure what you read but I didn't ask any questions. I only suggested a program to the original poster because I liked it and he didn't mention it in his list. I never once mentioned yWriter, either.


----------



## garza (Nov 19, 2010)

Of course Notepad is a text editor, as I have repeatedly said. That's why I use it for original composition and editing. A text editor is simpler to use than a word processor. But I depend on Word for formatting. I've pointed out that the Newsletter is a good example of how I work. All the text is written and edited in Notepad, and the pages, including text and graphics, are assembled in Word. If I were going to a printer with it I would assemble the pages with Pagemaker instead, as I do with books. (All except the Belize Social Security Handbook, which I assembled completely in Word and took to the printer on a cd camera ready. Don't ask me why I did that.)

If you go back and read through all of my last few posts you will understand better what I'm saying. The first principle is to use what works best for you. If you are not comfortable with the bare bones of a text editor or simple word processor such as WordPad, then you need to look for software that better suits the way you work. Some of that software, such as ywriter, is free. That's why I mention it. I personally don't like it, but others find it to be a great help. 

Some writing software costs money, and that's where I start to have a real problem because of the claims made by some of the promotional material. No software can turn you into a writer, but some software may be able to help you organise your ideas better. If the software really helps, then it's worth the money, just as it's worth it to me to pay for Microsoft Office. I've got Open Office. I tried it. I don't like it. I've already convinced myself that my New Year's gift to myself will be a new machine with Windows Seven and Office 2010 installed. 

Don't dismiss the free stuff, Notepad, WordPad, ywriter, and such, without trying them to see if they work for you. If none of them do, then shop for what will work for you. Just be sure that when you spend your money you get your money's worth.


----------



## Lamperoux (Nov 19, 2010)

Cambyses said:


> I cannot imagine trying to write code without syntax highlighting, code debugging, line numbers, and the ability to "find" phrases in your code.  That's why I use Notepad++.  Though I suppose I could deal with writing HTML in Notepad because of its structural simplicity.  That would still bug me.
> 
> As to writing, I usually save my characters, plot outline, etc. in different Word (2007) files and have them all open as I write.  I personally have never seen a need to invest in "writing" software to help me organize my thoughts.


 
i'm taking java right now, as a high-school class. I must say it's pretty fun, though torture to learn initially.


----------



## WolfieReveles (Nov 19, 2010)

Personally I'm still on Word, simply because it gives me what I need and I'm already comfortable with the program. I think that's basically the core of any writers choice of software. I remember a chap was on these boards, not so long ago actually, requesting help with a survey intended as a reference for the software he was going to develop for some school project. It was a software that would aid the writer during the development of a story. This survey was quite open and left a large space where one could describe what functions would be desired.

Personally I sat down and mapped out each and every function I would like to see in a program, regretting later that I didn't call a few buddies and have them program it for me instead. Despite this I also realize that these are the functions I would want, but perhaps not the system best suited for all writers. After all, as writers we have two main tools: The space where we write the story(or various drafts) and the space where we keep our notes*. Anything beyond this is just a system for organizing the two. In the end that system will always be as personal as a signature. Even with a software guiding us we would probably give it our own touch. 

Personally I make due with one word document of the actual work, and one with notes. I remember seeing what I believe was a screenshot posted by Garza, with about 6 notepad windows running parallel, and that's another way. I even spoke to someone who used a tablet to hand-write notes directly into MS Paint, just to get that sensation when he scribbled and crossed things out. This means only one thing to me: Perhaps there will one day be a software that convinces me more than Word, but the idea of a universal software for writers is probably doomed. Developing one that everyone is comfortable with, or even one that a large fraction are comfortable with, is like getting the world to agree on one single kind of pizza from one particular pizza-place.



*I am including visualizations and sources of inspiration in this category.


----------



## WolfieReveles (Nov 19, 2010)

As a sidenote:
I once used the extended character development sheets from a role playing game(new World of Darkness) to outline my characters for a short horror story. Worked like a charm. All the aspects may not be comprehensible to those unfamiliar with the game(and includes some things that are utterly useless outside the game) but it actually provides a pretty complete profile of a characters personality, traits, abilities, strengths, weaknesses and biography.

Here's a link if anyone's interested, or just curious. 4 pages, interactive PDF.
http://mrgone.rocksolidshells.com/pdf/NWOD/NWoD4-Page_Editable.pdf


----------



## Jeremy Taylor (Nov 20, 2010)

On a slight tangent, I now have two monitors, a 25 inch Samsung (which is wonderful) and a 19 inch Viewsonic, the one I upgraded from, which is fine, but the two of them working together is a pure delight. I can have notes on one screen and the main text on the other - very useful.


----------



## Scarlett_156 (Nov 21, 2010)

Take the question out of context for a moment, and then you can maybe find the answer for yourself.  It's not as simple a matter as essential rejection or acceptance of technology. 

Say you are a painter.  (I know lots of painters, and I feel I can safely state that the typical painter is not so different than the typical writer that I can't make a few general comparisons between them.) 

The medium of painting has changed a lot over the last thousand years or so.  To make things more complex, in addition to painting with a brush and palette, one now can literally paint on film with a light-box (photography) and also light box "by the numbers" (digital photography).  There are in addition to technological advances in art advances in painting itself with new types of pigments, bases, brushes, painting surfaces, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum. 

Do people still use plain old weasel-hair brushes (or whatever they're made out of) to paint?  

Yes, of course they do.  Since I live in the same house with painters (*groan*) I know the price fluctuations of paintbrushes and posterboard almost better than I know the price of an O-Z of commercial on the street.  (I said "almost".) Paintbrushes (for art) remain in high demand.  People still buy canvases like hotcakes, too.  Go figure.  Those crazy artists and their insistence on clinging to the past.  When will they ever learn?  (etc) 

Is the best digital imagery "better than" the best example of oil painting?  Is a digital artist automatically more skilled than an artist who sketches in pastels...?  

We do have the wonderful technological advances of machines that are able, almost as if by magic, to create fascinating images completely in a completely automated way--I know this for a fact, because I do love playing with stuff like that just like almost everybody else does.  

Regardless of how miraculous the mechanically produced images are--are they necessarily "better" than human art produced with a pencil and paper....? 

Also consider that various animals (most prominently apes, elephants, and certain types of birds) have been shown to have some sort of grasp on the concept of art, being able to freehand, -trunk, -beak, or -foot recognizable images.  Animal-created art is often surprisingly pleasing.  

Does the animal feel motivated to create art on a regular basis, however?  Can its artistic impulses be forced or channeled into some format that might be more profitable for its human keepers?  

Creative writing and journalism are not just complicated tasks.  Becoming published is not a gimmick or due to a crafty marketing scheme. 

To make them task-like--and to suggest that, given the right input, even a purely automatic process can create an entertaining, thought-provoking, human work of art--might result in short-term profit for the person who succeeds in selling it. 

(I said "might" result in short-term profit....)

Going back again to the comparison with painting:  If you go out and spend several thousands on brushes, canvas, art lessons, a nice camera, and so on--does that guarantee you a masterpiece?  

Certainly having all the most expensive and up-to-date tools and supplies is a great incentive to be creative, but certainly it's no substitute for creativity. 

A brand new guitar and guitar lessons from the best teacher in town does not make you a rock star.  In 95% of cases all it's going to make you is a guy (or girl) who has a brand-new guitar in the closet that's completely covered with dust until you shamefully decide to sell it on eBay.  

Me telling you that is not going to keep you from wasting your money on the new guitar, however.


----------



## WolfieReveles (Nov 21, 2010)

I agree with you in your reasoning, the tools don't make the artist, no matter what art is in focus. As far as software goes I think it's more a question of comfort. The great writers of the past(or at least most of them) could never have grasped the idea of the modern screen and keyboard. I'd say software is better compared to a chair, notebook and a desk. You can write on a napkin, seated on the ground. Then you find the chair, notebook and the desk, and it works better for you. From there you discover that you are more comfortable working with a typewriter, then a computer and finally you pick, perhaps, MS Word.

It's not really about tools that make you a better writer, it's about trading your plastic chair for one with a padded seat, and then an ergonomic chair, and so on. Picasso, Giger, Matisse, these men were not great because of their choice of tools, but because of their vision. This goes for any artist, because after all anyone can invest in good materials but not anyone will produce something worth even so much as the original investment.

Many writers reject the notion of writing related software, expecting some sort of "fill in the blanks" system. Really I think it's just a matter of asking oneself if there is anything that could make your experience more comfortable, perhaps even trying some of the available programs. I myself remain content with a clean page where I can type away, but the day I find a better option I'll jump on it. I think this goes hand in hand with your similie, since this is what visual artists have done through out the ages. No medium or technique has ever really been lost, but new ones have been added. Out of these each artist chooses the one that best suits his or her needs.

As writers our final result is a series of words. These words will finally look the same regardless of the software or method behind them. In this case the process becomes relevant only to the writer, making choice of software(or lack thereof) quite irrelevant to the reader. Returning to my earlier point; it is little more then the chair you choose to sit on or the desk where you work. It's comfort and nothing more.


----------



## I-FLUX (Nov 21, 2010)

I tried several word processors. I am Japanese and I write vertically so I wanted to find a good one. Unfortunately, the best one so far is Microsoft Word. It might be because I am used to it, but honestly, Microsoft Word works the best.


----------



## Cory Lamontagne (Nov 21, 2010)

I like to write without distraction, much like garza. So I use DarkRoom. (With more than one monitor you have to turn the others off for the best distractionless environment.)

The use of this app is for clear stream of thought. Not for editing.


----------



## juliow (Nov 27, 2010)

I love writing with Word just because it catches a lot of the stuff that I might otherwise not.  Of course, I always edit each article I write in a different font, but I mainly write online articles so I'm the only thing standing in between typos and errors.  Don't always have an editor.


----------



## garza (Nov 27, 2010)

Cory Lamontagne - I downloaded Dark Room and tried it, liked it, and no doubt will use it. 

Are you by any chance from south Louisiana, around Breaux Bridge? I used to know a family by that name, only they wrote it La Montagne.


----------



## nguyen (Nov 28, 2010)

For some who cant afford writing programs. Open Office is free. Of course, it doesn't compare to the expensive name brands like Microsoft word it gets the job done =]


----------



## garza (Nov 28, 2010)

I can't agree that Open Office does everything Microsoft Office does. It tries, but somehow it lacks the sure-footed stability and compatibility of Microsoft products. Word is not that expensive when you consider all it will do. I don't use it for writing, but I use it for all document preparation and have not found anything else as good.

Of course just for writing you already have Notepad and WordPad bundled with Windows for free.


----------



## nguyen (Nov 28, 2010)

I agree. Microsoft is an excellent program. Iv yet found a word program that compares.


----------



## caelum (Nov 29, 2010)

But is there a way to make profit with that approach, Flea?  That is, if you care about profit.


----------



## KrisMunro (Jan 17, 2011)

I'll thank them if it's free..  

If it's not, I'll say 'you're welcome' after they thank me for buying.


----------



## Richard.E.Craig (Jan 18, 2011)

I know it might be old fashioned,but when I write;I always have a Mk1 Bic and _real _ note book by my side! Flicking through a A4 refill pad to find reference material is personally easier for me.I can quickly write thoughts as they occur.When I then commit the words to word processor,I edit and check spelling and grammar as I move along.


----------



## Lamperoux (Jan 18, 2011)

besides, when was the last time you heard stephen king pin his successful career on a nice writing software? I thought so.


----------



## victoria stiles (Sep 1, 2011)

I have been using open office. This software can be used as an alternative to Microsoft Office. It is  also a whole office suite so it is can replace other programs like Excel  and PowerPoint. It "is the leading open-source office software suite  for word processing, spreadsheets, presentations, graphics, databases  and more." Open Office is available in several languages and it works on  common computers. Good to use for normal creations.


----------



## Aello (Sep 1, 2011)

I'm pretty sure there is a version of Word that would enable you to send your work to a colleague and have them send it back with notes all over it. I was introduced to it at school a few years ago in a business class, and the big draw to it was that you could have your work marked up, yet still preserve the original document. And of course, it was Word, so there was also the spell checker and everything. 

Unfortunately, I think it was a subscription service, so it won't be useful to an individual. But if only someone could create that for personal use...


----------

