I wanted to reply to this topic more in-depth. I own a copy of Scrivener. I don't have Ulysses (yet), but I have used their trial software. I have spent a significant amount of time over the past 6 months trying to find a writing workflow that works for me. I haven't found it yet, but am getting closer. Maybe this will help you.
I apologize for the length.
I've been looking at both Scrivener and Ulysses as tools to use in writing a book. It would be a bonus if I also found either one or the other to be useful for shorter writings as well from notes to essays to whatever.
Worthy of note, learning and using markdown would be a new thing for me. I'm not particularly thrilled about doing that versus just using a WYSIWYG editor instead. I think either of them allow you to write in an uncluttered view that hides the UI when you want to focus on the writing.
Well, at their core, bot Ulysses and Scrivener do the same thing. They allow you to write text in a potentially uncluttered view and (most importantly) write in a non-liner format. For example, when you open word you have a strand of pages. To move in between sections requires scrolling, jumping, copy and pasting, etc. Also, it is not very easy to rearrange your writing and make edits over and over. Word is best used for a memo or (as I use it) for a moderately short essay where you start at the beginning and write through until the end.
This can be unwieldily if you're writing a 50 pages research report, a 100+ page book, keeping a journal, or (like me) writing an 80 page thesis. Scrivener and Ulysses allow you to break up your writing and offer
much easier ways to reorganize and work with your text. For instance, I changed the structure of my thesis 8 times. I was able to rearrange section, change headings, and introduce new section all in the Binder (sidebar). This would have been annoying and cumbersome in Pages or Word.
Generally, what I've found is that Scrivener can do anything Ulysses can do and 100 more things, but that doesn't mean Scrivener is better. Sometimes, that is a negative. I explain more further down.
I got the impression that one of Scrivener's strengths is support for researching information one might require. I will be doing some research simply to present certain information of interest and provide the reader with credible sources where it from. So that would be helpful not only for this project but I could see it being useful in the future for other writing as well.
Both Ulysses and Scrivener support attachments. You can drag text, PDFs, images, etc. over and veiw them as another column or as a separate window. Scrivener is the king here; it's a literal digital junk drawer/thought bucket. You can drag
anything to Scrivener including audio files, web clippings (Scrivener has a built in feature for this), any file type you'd use (including the basic MS Office suite, but not fancy ones like OneNote files or Access files of course). You can organize them in a folder hierarchy and open as many as you want and drag them all over the place. Ulysses doesn't support as many file types (no audio).
Ulysses' implementation isn't as good to me. Instead of a folder hierarchy, they appear as thumbnails in a sidebar on the right in a thumbnail view (see screenshot). You can pull them off and have them as standalone windows like with Scrivener. Ulysses' implementation is nice if you just need to view an image, but if you have dozens of attachments it is a really poor way to do it. One thing I like better though is that they appear in a separate column, whereas if you click one in Scrivener it replaces your text view in the main window. You need to either right click or select the research file and press the spacebar to open it in another window. Scrivener's is much better with organizing them and handling several attachments, but I wish clicking them automatically opened a column view or window view instead of the current way it's done.
I would not attempt to do a large research project with Ulysses unless all my research materials were in a separate Finder folder that opened in their native apps. With Scrivener, all I needed was Scrivener because it had such good organization and could natively open everything I threw at it.
Something Ulysses seems to emphasize is keeping all of your writings in one place with global search across them all supported. I don't know if Scrivener works similarly or not. Just taking a superficial glance so far I got the impression from screen shots of the UI for each of them that Scrivener seems to incorporate more in the way of organizational tools for a given project but I may be completely off there with the limited investigation I've done so far.
This is one of the biggest differences and makes each app better at different things to me. Think of each Scrivener file as a large, special folder where your writing, planning, organization, and reference files are stored. All inside that .scriv file. Each scrivener file would be separate. For example, I would have a Scrivener file for my thesis, one for my book, one for my journal, one for a semester of classes. They stand alone, independent of each other.
Ulysses is different. There are no Ulysses files accessible to the user (they are hidden in the system library).
ALL your writing is in one unified library. Ulysses doesn't use folders, but you have the same effect using sheets like in my screenshot. They're not called folders (I think they're called groups) but they work the same way. So you'd have one group for each book, one for your thesis, one for your semester, etc. And of course you can have nested groups/folders in either app.
This is where each app applies to a different scenario for me. I don't want my thesis in the same "library" as my book or class notes, or general journal. If I'm writing a thesis or a book I want them to be in their own, self-contained, independent file. I open my Thesis Scrivener file and all the info is right there and nothing that doesn't pertain to it is there. With Ulysses, everything you ever write is stored in that one library, there are no multiple libraries. If you write a lot, this would get out of hand very fast in my opinion.
What is good though, is that you can just launch Ulysses and you're there. All your writing is available. You don't have to open an app and then find the file. The app
is the writing in essence. For me, this makes Ulysses a great journaling app. If I'm going to undertake a large research project or any massive writing project, it will be with an independent Scrivener file, but I also want a general journal. Not a daily diary, but a place to store my random thoughts, write about my opinions, feelings, etc. I am thinking about moving to Ulysses for this. This one large "library" will be my expansive journal. Now, I could accomplish the same thing just a Scrivener file, but like I said earlier, sometimes Scrivener's features can get in the way if you just want simple, random writing and not an ultimately large, coherent document. Scrivener would certainly work for a journal and many people do, but I like the simplicity of Ulysses and the concept of "just open the app and you're there" for a journal.
Also, Ulysses uses Markdown. I'm not that crazy about Markdown, however it is pretty universal. Meaning you could copy and past the text from Ulysses into another Markdown editor and keep going should you want to leave Ulysses. Markdown was designed to be simple and seamless so you never had to leave your keyboard to do basic formatting. Personally, I prefer WYSIWYG editors like Scrivener, but I don't mind it at all for a journal. I would not want to write my thesis in Markdown because then I would have to change EVERYTHING when I exported it to work for final formatting. Markdown can be exported as a formatted document and that works well for website or book drafts for publishers, but for academic writing with special margins, page breaks, an styles, Markdown is too much work. Again, it depends on the situation.
I think both apps offer free trial versions on their web sites that I just glanced at briefly this morning in which case I will give them both a spin to see them firsthand.
This is the best thing to do. And some advice. Scrivener has a tutorial file that you read through and it's interactive. It takes a few hours if you do it all at one time, but it is
really good and really helps you get up and running. I came away liking both apps for different reasons and different uses. Though it may sound silly, the "feel" of an app is very important and can only be gained through use.
Are there any writers here using one or the other or having had experience with both who could share some insight about the relative strengths and weaknesses of each product?
Hopefully, this helped you. I'm still relatively new to Scrivener and have only used it "professionally" for my thesis and only used about 20% of the available features. I am using it as a temporary journal now.
Scrivener just has so many features:
- split view
- keywords, tags, notes
- synopses
- snapshots
- Compile (1000 features in itself)
- About 100 more features
I highly doubt any writer uses them all, but this is a double edged sword. These are powerful features than dramatically help the writing process and there are so many features that you aren't forced into the developer's workflow. You can pick and choose the features you want to use and make your own workflow. Another thing is that if you don't use certain features, they're not in your face. Unless you access the Preference Pane, most features are hidden or can be hidden. This allows you to make Scrivener as powerful or as simple as you like.
Still, it can overwhelming for some and some writers may prefer a simple app and not a complex app masquerading as simple. Again, that's a personal choice.
Any advice for this novice would be greatly appreciated. If I am not thinking of important information needed to guide me here, please let me know and I'll be glad to try to be more specific.
There is another significant reason that again pushes me toward Ulysses for some things (like a journal or school notes). Ulysses has a very good iPad app (with some iCloud sync problems that are supposed to be being ironed out or have been fixed in past updates). Scrivener has no iOS app. One has been coming for 3 years and they claimed it was almost done, but now are asking for a new iOS developer because it's behind. When it does come, it will be Dropbox only.
Again, there is the issue of opening the app and thing finding the Scrivener file vs just opening the app and having all of your text just there. For me, I wouldn't work on a big project on my iPad, but I would work on journal from my iPad (that's actually crucial for me), so Ulysses is the best one for that use.
Conclusion:
Both apps are really good. Both have amazing app support. Ulysses gets regular updates. Scrivener is a small team, but there is faithful support (but they're slower). Again, I like both apps. Scrivener is amazing and really changes the way you can write if it's a long piece. Ulysses is great, but simpler, but can still really change the writing process.
For me: Scrivener for really powerful, complex writing where you may jump back and forth. Word for school essays and small documents that will suffer from complex and split sections. Ulysses (maybe) for future journals and general writings.
Again, it all varies by the writer. There are some writers who can write a 500 page book in Word. Others like something even more basic like Text Edit. You can give them all a try and see how you like it. I hope this has given you a general overview and may be able to help you.
Edited June 27th to fix typos. Sorry, I was in a hurry.
