Scriptware vs. Final Draft
mikeg
I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
is better.
Mike.
Skip Press
> I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
> is better.
>
PC, Scriptware. Mac, Final Draft.
--
All the best,
Skip Press
The Duke of URL
http://www.hollywoodnetwork.com/skip
Writer's Guide to Hwd. Producers, Directors & Screenwriters' Agents
http://www.primapublishing.com/life/76150399.html
Steven Sashen
Skip Press wrote:
>
> In article <3484E4...@southland.net>, mikeg <mi...@southland.net> wrote:
>
> > I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
> > is better.
> >
> PC, Scriptware. Mac, Final Draft.
>
You haven't looked at Scriptware for Macintosh yet, I take it.
Everything that made Scriptware the most popular PC program is now
available on the Mac. A demo is on our website at
http://scriptware.com.
Be well,
Steven Sashen
Screenplay Systems
And actually, recent reviews of ScriptThing and Movie Magic Screenwriter
have put both these packages above the Windows versions of Final Draft
and Scriptware....
Stephen
steve
mikeg wrote:
>
> I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
> is better.
>
Mike,
Check out our product, FINAL DRAFT. It is cross-platform compatible and
has been available as such since 1996! Download a free demo from our
website:
and if you have any questions, e-mail or call us at 310-636-4711
Enjoy
Steve Szermer
Brevity
dles...@earthlink.net wrote:
> That may be, however, I purchased Movie Magic Screenwriter for my Mac
>(I use "Virtual PC" which is Windows 95) and there it sits, unused, on
>my shelf. I was assured by your salesperson (a man, I can't remember
>his name right off) that I would be able to use the software. Well I
>can't, and since you don't have a Mac version, I have to place my vote
>for Final Draft, which at least is available for both formats. What a
>HUGE waste of money and confidence.
>dl
I think Stphen allows for return and full refund within 30 days, and
should allow same after a longer period of the software is literally
unusable on your system.
-Brevity (remove the x to reply via email)
dles...@earthlink.net
Bob Miller
mikeg <mi...@southland.net> wrote:
>I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
>is better.
>
>Mike.
Another option, go to the Writers Computer Store at
http://www.writerscomputer.com
They sell everything. They also have links to downloadable demos for
virtually every popular program. You try 'em. You decide.
(I use Script Thing. Highly recommended.)
Bob
My 2 centavos' worth...
Bob Miller
bmi...@neosoft.com
dwa...@tiac.net
Well, since I still haven't recieved the update from scriptware that
they have been promising me for months... I'll have to try Final
Draft.
Screenplay Systems
> That may be, however, I purchased Movie Magic Screenwriter for my Mac
> (I use "Virtual PC" which is Windows 95) and there it sits, unused, on
> my shelf.
I don't know who you spoke with (it would help if you could remember),
but my staff does not reccomend doing the virtual PC thing. I know that
DreamWorks uses ScriptThing running under Virtual PC, and I'm told they
have success with it.
Have you spoken to our customer service dept? I'm sure that the least
we could do is send you a Mac version once it's finished.
Stephen
WriteTV
Wow. Cinovation, Screenplay Systems and BC Software ALL weighed in on this.
Shall I get out the ruler, guys? Sheesh.
Software choice is personal. I like Scriptware, but I've used Final Draft and
the old Movie Master for DOS, and I've seen demos of ScriptThing and was very
impressed.
Until recently, if you have a Mac the only option you had was FD. The other
companies are now releasing Mac versions, and FD has a windows version.
Go to their websited, download the demos, try them out. Then make up your own
mind.
Genia
-----------------------------------------------
"No matter how paranoid you think you are, you're not paranoid enough."
-- THE X-FILES, "Unusual Suspects," written by Vince Gilligan
Ron Drake
> Skip Press wrote:
> >
> > In article <3484E4...@southland.net>, mikeg <mi...@southland.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
> > > is better.
> > >
> > PC, Scriptware. Mac, Final Draft.
> >
>
>
> You haven't looked at Scriptware for Macintosh yet, I take it.
> Everything that made Scriptware the most popular PC program is now
> available on the Mac. A demo is on our website at
> http://scriptware.com.
I have to say that the demo was very impressive. Using the tab key
to select successive style elements instantly strikes me as more in-
tuitive/less intrusive than the "pre-ordained" elements method of
Final Draft. Having said that, though, I'm still EXTREMELY happy
with Final Draft. I bought the templates/examples for popular shows
and can vouch for their accuracy. FD's Scene Navigator has given me
a foothold on the index card mode of outlining and their adherence
to the Apple User Interface Guidelines is pert near 100%.
Before I bought FD, I test drove the Scriptwright Template for Word
(the Windows template is easily converted to Macintosh if you're not
using WFW 7 yet).
--
+++
Don't forget to remove the first "dot" from r.dr...@ix.netcom.com
or you won't reach me!
Screenplay Systems
>Wow. Cinovation, Screenplay Systems and BC Software
>ALL weighed in on this.
>Shall I get out the ruler, guys? Sheesh.
Well, a ruler measures LENGTH, not weight...
I think it's great to have our participation here. After all, we're the
experts on the subect of software.
Stephen Greenfield
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>>Wow. Cinovation, Screenplay Systems and BC Software
>>ALL weighed in on this.
>>Shall I get out the ruler, guys? Sheesh.
>Well, a ruler measures LENGTH, not weight...
I cannot believe you REALLY misunderstood Genia's line. Really?
'Fess up.
Rich Wilson
Brevity wrote:
>
> Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>
> >>Wow. Cinovation, Screenplay Systems and BC Software
> >>ALL weighed in on this.
>
> >>Shall I get out the ruler, guys? Sheesh.
>
> >Well, a ruler measures LENGTH, not weight...
>
> I cannot believe you REALLY misunderstood Genia's line. Really?
> 'Fess up.
Um, actually now that you've made me read it more carefully, looks
to me like Stephen made a pretty good joke out of Genia's jibe. I
didn't notice her "weighed" verb first time around. Not bad for a
software geek. <gdr>
--
Rich Wilson
http://www.communicator.com
Chris Owen
On Tue, 02 Dec 1997 20:49:08 -0800, mikeg <mi...@southland.net> wrote:
>I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
>is better.
The following extract is from the
occasionally-posted-but-really-quite-useful m.w.s mini-FAQ.
--- ---
2.6 What is the best/cheapest software?
There are many different software options available to screenwriters,
from add-ons to popular word processing packages to full featured
stand-alone programmes. The sites below contain links and reviews of
available software.
http://www.teleport.com/~cdeemer/Software.html
http://www.communicator.com/swsoft.html
The following site sells commercial screenwriting software. Demos are
available.
Jeff Miholer has a page on how to create your own templates.
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~miholer/
--- ---
>Mike.
Chris
--
Chris Owen christop...@vuw.ac.nz
NZScript http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/5088/
--
WriteTV
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> writes:
<< >Wow. Cinovation, Screenplay Systems and BC Software
>ALL weighed in on this.
>Shall I get out the ruler, guys? Sheesh.
Well, a ruler measures LENGTH, not weight...
I think it's great to have our participation here. After all, we're the
experts on the subect of software. >>
Like Brevity, I'm REALLY surprised that anybody could have misunderstood that
line.
And yes, Stephen, I think it's terrific that you guys participate here --
except that it's always the same old song...
Mine's better.
No, mine's better.
You're both wrong, mine's better.
I say again -- sheesh.
How 'bout giving us some information we can use -- price information, possible
discounts (like competitive upgrades), unique features, when current users
might expect a new version (like for Win95, Mr. Sashen, hint hint)...
steven sashen
In article <19971206193...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
wri...@aol.com (WriteTV) wrote:
> How 'bout giving us some information we can use -- price information, possible
> discounts (like competitive upgrades), unique features, when current users
> might expect a new version (like for Win95, Mr. Sashen, hint hint)...
The official announcement about Scriptware version 3 (with native
versions for Win 3.1 and Win95) and our competitive upgrade pricing for
both Scriptware for Mac and Windows will be made next week...
stay tuned, same bat time, same bat channel.
Steven Sashen
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Screenplay Systems
>>Not bad for a software geek. <gdr>
Hey -- not bad for a produced SCREENWRITER software geek!
Stephen
Screenplay Systems
> I cannot believe you REALLY misunderstood Genia's line. Really?
> 'Fess up.
Actually, it wasn't that clear to me at first. Just having some fun...
Stephen
Screenplay Systems
Well, most of our detailed info is on our web site(s). I'll try to be
more useful in the future.
Stephen Greenfield
Screenplay Systems
<http://www.screenplay.com>
Screenplay Systems
>Win95 (for Scriptware)
Are you saying there's no Windows 95 version of Scriptware currently
available?
Stephen
Bill Blum
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>>Win95 (for Scriptware)
>Stephen
Now you know better than that.
Bill
(Not affiliated with any other Bills)
Chris Owen
On Mon, 08 Dec 1997 11:45:37 +0000, Screenplay Systems
<S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>>Win95 (for Scriptware)
>Are you saying there's no Windows 95 version of Scriptware currently
>available?
>Stephen
Don't you love the smell of software sellers baiting each other in the
morning? Love the way that Screenplay Systems Stephen edited
Cinovation Steven's message to the absolute minimum (including
omitting an atrribution to the quote). :)
Mike Shields
In article <348BDD...@Screenplay.com>, Screenplay Systems
<S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
> >Win95 (for Scriptware)
>
> Are you saying there's no Windows 95 version of Scriptware currently
> available?
>
> Stephen
A better question would be, when will there be a Mac version of
SCREENWRITER, and when do I get a review copy???
Mike
--
***Note New eMail address!!! Although, I can still be reached at MShi...@ccgate.hac.com. Thanks.
"Not too many people know that I'm famous." - Mike Shields
I need $600,000 for a film. Serious inquiries only.
Read "About this Particular MacIntosh" available online near you!!!
On the Web at: http://www.atpm.com
"You can't write this stuff. It happens in real life." - Mike Shields
Who leads the anarchy?
"In the future, everyone will have their own Web Page." Mike Shields
ASGTPR #54
Mike Shields
> Skip Press wrote:
> >
> > In article <3484E4...@southland.net>, mikeg <mi...@southland.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm curious as to people's opinions and preferences as to which package
> > > is better.
> > >
> > PC, Scriptware. Mac, Final Draft.
> >
>
>
> You haven't looked at Scriptware for Macintosh yet, I take it.
> Everything that made Scriptware the most popular PC program is now
> available on the Mac. A demo is on our website at
> http://scriptware.com.
>
> Be well,
> Steven Sashen
Does this mean that I can now state in public that I've been one of the
beta testers for the Mac version, and I think the program is fantastic???
Bill Blum
christop...@vuw.ac.nz (Chris Owen) wrote:
>On Mon, 08 Dec 1997 11:45:37 +0000, Screenplay Systems
><S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>>>Win95 (for Scriptware)
>>Are you saying there's no Windows 95 version of Scriptware currently
>>available?
>>Stephen
>Don't you love the smell of software sellers baiting each other in the
>morning? Love the way that Screenplay Systems Stephen edited
>Cinovation Steven's message to the absolute minimum (including
>omitting an atrribution to the quote). :)
>Chris
>
Since I believe both gentlemen do know each other, I suspect Mr. G. is
chiding Mr. S.
And, for the record, both guys are the sort of people you want to do
business with and both companies make and support excellent products.
I say this from first hand experience.
Brevity
christop...@vuw.ac.nz (Chris Owen) wrote:
>On Mon, 08 Dec 1997 11:45:37 +0000, Screenplay Systems
><S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>>>Win95 (for Scriptware)
>>Are you saying there's no Windows 95 version of Scriptware currently
>>available?
>>Stephen
>Don't you love the smell of software sellers baiting each other in the
>morning? Love the way that Screenplay Systems Stephen edited
>Cinovation Steven's message to the absolute minimum (including
>omitting an atrribution to the quote). :)
>Chris
>
>--
>Chris Owen christop...@vuw.ac.nz
>NZScript http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/5088/
>--
Steven Greenfield of Screenplay Systems has drawn Steve Sashen into
public pissing matches elsewhere. A very unprofessional way of doing
business to my mind. I hope Sashen takes the high road and just
responds briefly, or just ignores the bait.
Screenplay Systems
Mike Shields wrote:
> A better question would be, when will there be a Mac version of
> SCREENWRITER, and when do I get a review copy???
We're waiting for a beta during the next week. When the Mac version of
Screenwriter is release, I'll post an announcement here.
Stephen Greenfield
Screenplay Systems
<hhtp://www.screenplay.com>
Screenplay Systems
xab...@juno.com (Brevity) wrote:
> Steven Greenfield of Screenplay Systems has drawn Steve Sashen into
> public pissing matches elsewhere. A very unprofessional way of doing
> business to my mind.
Well, that's partially true and a long time ago. Steven Sashen has had
his share of unprofessional behavior, like registering the domain of
ScriptThing.com (Ken Schafer's trademark) so Ken would have to come to
him to "ask" him for his own intellectual property.
But regarding the lack of a Windows 95 version of Scriptware, I think
you are assuming more devious intent than what was actually going
through my mind. I was simply caught off guard that there was no
Windows 95 version -- I had assumed there was. I just assumed he would
respond appropriately -- it's not a big deal that portends a flame war.
Stephen
Melvakian
>Well, that's partially true and a long time ago. Steven Sashen has >had his
share of unprofessional behavior, like registering the >domain of
ScriptThing.com (Ken Schafer's trademark) so Ken >would have to come to him to
"ask" him for his own intellectual >property.
Mr. Sashen,
Did you really do such a thing? If so, I find that to be one of the most
repugnant things I have ever heard. Ever.
I once had a person (in another field of business) do such a thing against me
and my company. The Department of Justice was brought into the matter, and
this man paid a hefty fine. Hefty.
Certainly I wish to hear your side of the matter.
So, it this true, Mr. Sashen? Did you actually do this?
YM
dwa...@tiac.net
Fellow screenwriters,
I can't say which is best since I only own one, Scriptware.
I do like the program emensly but I still haven't recieved the update
that was promised to me when I purchased it at the Showbiz expo in New
York many months ago.
Steve Sashen even emailed me and promised that the update would be
shipping in 10 days. That was over a month ago.
Still no update.
I guess you could say I'm starting to get pissed since the reason I
chose Scriptware was directly due to some of the features he
demonstrated on the update.
Steve, if you're listening... SEND ME MY UPDATE, MAN!!! Please...
Love your shoes babe,
Dwayne
Steven Sashen
Let me say 2 things:
1) Mr. Greenfield will be hearing from my attorney today.
2) Here's what DID happen. When I signed up for my domain name, I also
signed up Scriptthing.com. As you may know, after requesting a domain,
the Internic then sends you a confirmation letter, asking if, in fact,
you want the domain in question. I told them to CANCEL Scriptthing.com
and I paid ONLY for Scriptware.
The Internic Billing department confirmed that they accidentally
assigned the scriptthing.com to me, and took my *one* payment and
assigned it to both domains. The Internic was not processing deletes
(because some companies were deleting their competetor's domains). Mr.
Greenfield and Shafer both knew that if Mr. Shafer had the registered
trademark ScriptThing, that all he had to do to get the domain was send
a copy of his trademark registration to the Internic and they would
assign him the domain.
Rather than taking the simple actions required to acquire the domain,
Mr. Shafer and Mr. Greenfield repeatedly misrepresented my intentions
and my actions while trying to make Mr. Shafer out to be some sort of
victim.
To me, it's sad that they felt the need to tell their fictional tale of
woe, and engage people like yourself in their inaccurate story, instead
of simply putting a 32 cent stamp on a letter and resolving the matter.
Hope that clears it up.
Steven Sashen
******************************************************************
"Scriptware is the best overall program for scriptwriters
on the market today"
-- the Journal (of the Writer's Guild of America, west)
For more info: http://scriptware.com or 303/786-7899
******************************************************************
steven sashen
> Does this mean that I can now state in public that I've been one of the
> beta testers for the Mac version, and I think the program is fantastic???
>
> Mike
Yes it does. Thank you.
SS
steven sashen
Sorry that the update has been delayed (find a new release *ever* that
hasn't been).
We're waiting for updated software from our Spell Check company before we
get the thing out the door.
Soon (but not soon enough for either of us ;) )
Steven Sashen
Screenplay Systems
Steven Sashen Wrote:
> Rather than taking the simple actions required to acquire the domain,
> Mr. Shafer and Mr. Greenfield repeatedly misrepresented my intentions
> and my actions while trying to make Mr. Shafer out to be some sort of
> victim.
Well, the question we should all be asking (which I have asked Steve
Sashen in the past) is WHY he would have tried (and apparent succeeded)
to register Ken Schafer's domain name in the first place.
What other possible motivation could be attributed to such an act,
except to harass a competitor. (Sashen has been miffed at Ken Schafer
for a variety of reasons).
At one point, I suggested to Steven that the domain be returned, and he
suggested that Ken CALL HIM AND ASK FOR IT BACK. Essentially, this
appeared to be an immature game to get Ken to bend over and ask for
something back that should never have been taken. Ken, thankfully,
wasn't going to do that.
> The Internic Billing department confirmed that they accidentally
> assigned the scriptthing.com to me
I am amazed that Sashen thinks everyone is so gullible. HE initiated
the request for Ken's domain. Why should he be surprised when they
assigned it to him? If he knew it was a mistake, why did it take over
six months for him to decide to tell the InterNIC to return it?
The bottom line is one of responsibility and maturity. We all do things
to get under the skin of our competitors. Sashen happen to pick one of
the most egregious things someone could do: deliberately lock up the
trademarked name of Ken's company as his own domain.
> 1) Mr. Greenfield will be hearing from my attorney today.
Well, it's the end of the day and I still haven't heard from him. But
what is he going to say? When he discovers that the facts I've stated
are true, then there's nothing to be said. Steven, you did the act and
that's a fact. Fess up, quit making excuses, and accept responsibility
for your actions. As far as I'm concerned, so long as I report the
facts as I see them, there's no legal issue involved.
I should also point out that the "legal solution" seems to be the way
Mr. Sashen wants to handle everything. I know several people who have
been on the other end of his endless legal threats. Steve -- just cop
to what you did, perhaps a nice letter of apology would be appropriate.
Until then, this is just part of your personal (and corporate) history.
Stephen Greenfield
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>What other possible motivation could be attributed to such an act,
>except to harass a competitor.
And your dredging up of history, out of nowhere, is what, if not the
same? If Steve did what you claim, he was wrong. But your bringing
it up, after being accused of harrassing HIM is just as bad, just as
devious, and just as unprofessional. A curse on both your houses.
Grow up, Stephen, please - for the sake of the business, for the sake
of this and other places where you play tag the competition, and for
your own sake, please grow up. Compete on what's good about your
software, period. This childish finger pointing just brings down the
whole newsgroup, and brings you and your company down, in my
estimation at least.
Steven Sashen
A final and public note to Mr. Greenfield:
I have repeatedly told Mr. Greenfield the facts surrounding
scriptthing.com. He refuses to believe them and engages in name calling
and slander. Me thinks he doth protest too much.
As I'm not interested in engaging in this conversation any longer, I'm
publicly stating that any further response from Mr. Greenfield will be
unanswered by me.
If the stories he tells evoke questions for you, I'm happy to answer
them privately, though I'll be saying the same things I've already
publicly stated, since those are simply factual accounts of events from
3 years ago.
I know that by not bickering I'm stepping out of one of the most common
forms of entertainment online (the Oprah-ization of a newsgroup), and
I'm sure it will make the group more relevant and valuable.
Be well,
Screenplay Systems
Abram (brevity) Wrote:
> And your dredging up of history, out of nowhere, is what, if not the
> same?
Abram,
My asking a genuinely serious question, even if it appears to be
chiding, cannot be viewed in the same light as an illegal act, such as
reserving someone's trademark with the InterNIC.
Maybe you're right, that I should have kept my cool. But I didn't like
a simple informational question being called unprofessional in the light
of behavior that is at a different magnatude.
> This childish finger pointing just brings down the
> whole newsgroup
Still, it's not childish finger pointing. We're competitors, and we
compete in the public arena. When my competitors engage in behavior as
serious as what I've described, and they do it in the public arena (the
Internet/InterNIC), I think it is fair and legitimate to point it out.
You may think that as a childish act, but I think it's just the
opposite: a child learns that they are accountable for their actions.
The person pointing out the behavior isn't childish.
I hope my raising the issue in some what will make people (certainly
Steven) think twice about engaging in such a business practice.
And as far as the newsgroup is concerned, I'm sure there are some who
will agree with you. Others might find the content of this interchange
illuminating. I feel as long as I'm being honest and reporting true
facts, it's not childish.
Stephen Greenfield
Screenplay Systems
Well, you told me you reserved Ken's domain name as a joke. Ha, ha.
Somehow the humor was lost on Ken, myself and everyone else. Is that
the factual reason you reserved his domain name? It didn't magically
get assigned to Cinovation...
> He refuses to believe them and engages in name calling
> and slander.
I'm sure you're right about the InterNic billing problem. I don't
dispute those facts. What I've said is fact, too. So it's not slander,
or libel.
> I'm publicly stating that any further response from Mr. Greenfield
> will be unanswered by me.
Great. There's not much more that either you -- or I -- can say about
this.
Stephen Greenfield
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>Abram (brevity) Wrote:
>Abram,
>Stephen Greenfield
Doesn't wash, with me, anyway, Steven. If your initial question to
Steve was serious and I misinterpreted it, then that's what you should
explain. Instead, you brought up a totally outside issue having
nothing to do with the topic. THAT is what was childish. And your
competition based on finger pointing and name calling doesn't serve
you well at all, in my humble opinion. If that's all you have to work
with, then what does that say about your software? And no, I am not
asking for 200 lines of customer quotes again. Been there. Hated
that.
As for bringing down this forum, with the recent losses of both Genia
and Rich, there isn't much farther down this place can go. I think I
will sign off as well, and wish everyone a Happy Holiday Season, and a
healthy and successful New Year. Thankfully there are other online
places where serious discussions of screenwriting do take place, and
where the help of professionals is appreciated.
Screenplay Systems
> If that's all you have to work
> with, then what does that say about your software? And no, I am not
> asking for 200 lines of customer quotes again. Been there. Hated
> that.
Sorry you feel that way. The customer and press quotes about Dramatica
are a powerful selling tool. We just got another in from a Dramatica
user who won The Saltzburg Screenplay competition, and they complimented
his structure, which was Dramatica-developed.
> Thankfully there are other online
> places where serious discussions of screenwriting do take place, and
> where the help of professionals is appreciated.
I'm new to this forum, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. In my
view, NOTHING can "bring down a forum". Just skip the topics and
Senders you aren't interested in.
Another great forum in the Compuserve ShowBizMedia forum, where a lot of
working writers "hang out". We get into some serious discussions on
that forum, but it can get contentious. You might want to stay out of
the kitchen...
Re Sashen and childishness. OK, sometimes I have to bring myself down
to his level. It's a character flaw on my part. If you want to extend
that to my software, which is used on 95% of the feature films made,
then go ahead -- I kinda figure I can't convince you of anything anyway.
Stephen
Skip Press
In article <349A62...@Screenplay.com>, Screenplay Systems
<S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
[snip]
> Re Sashen and childishness. OK, sometimes I have to bring myself down
> to his level. It's a character flaw on my part. If you want to extend
> that to my software, which is used on 95% of the feature films made,
> then go ahead -- I kinda figure I can't convince you of anything anyway.
>
Ahem. Stephen, you fail to note that what you're really talking about is
Movie Magic and your budgeting and scheduling software, not Dramatica.
It's a little bit of a PR fudge you guys do, and you should knock it off.
--
All the best,
Skip Press
The Duke of URL
http://www.hollywoodnetwork.com/skip
Writer's Guide to Hwd. Producers, Directors & Screenwriters' Agents
http://www.primapublishing.com/life/76150399.html
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
Brevity wrote:
>> If that's all you have to work
>> with, then what does that say about your software? And no, I am not
>> asking for 200 lines of customer quotes again. Been there. Hated
>> that.
Steven replied:
>Sorry you feel that way. The customer and press quotes about Dramatica
>are a powerful selling tool. We just got another in from a Dramatica
>user who won The Saltzburg Screenplay competition, and they complimented
>his structure, which was Dramatica-developed.
You love slipping in an ad, don't you?
Brevity:
>> Thankfully there are other online
>> places where serious discussions of screenwriting do take place, and
>> where the help of professionals is appreciated.
Steven:
>Another great forum in the Compuserve ShowBizMedia forum, where a lot of
>working writers "hang out". We get into some serious discussions on
>that forum, but it can get contentious. You might want to stay out of
>the kitchen...
That's one kitchen in which the heat is refreshing and invigorating.
I'm there too.
Steven:
>Re Sashen and childishness. OK, sometimes I have to bring myself down
>to his level.
I feel your pain. Why would that be, though, since you are so much
superior to him?
Steven:
>It's a character flaw on my part. >
A flaw! In you?!
Steven:
> If you want to extend
>that to my software, which is used on 95% of the feature films made,
>then go ahead -- I kinda figure I can't convince you of anything anyway.
>Stephen
Please be clear that you are NOT discussing Dramatica in your 95%
quote.
Best,
Jacques E. Bouchard
Skip Press wrote:
> Ahem. Stephen, you fail to note that what you're really talking about is
> Movie Magic and your budgeting and scheduling software, not Dramatica.
> It's a little bit of a PR fudge you guys do, and you should knock it off.
The swarm of thinly veiled plugs aside (in the post to which you replied)
I just have to wonder: how did screenwriters and filmmakers ever manage twenty
years ago? I mean if the software had the slightest impact on the quality of
the finished product, wouldn't it stand to reason that movies now would be
greatly superior?
All I've seen so far to back up spurious claims is circumstantial
evidence: X percent of produced screenwriters eat pickles, therefore pickles
will help you be more successful.
The tactics used by software resellers on this newsgroup are
reprehensible. They prey on the novice who is already overwhelmed by the sheer
hostility of the business and feels compelled to take every action to increase
their odds. Meanwhile, the only people benefiting are the software companies.
They're glorified word processors, folks, and not very elaborate ones
either if you look at the behemoth that MS Word has become (and which can do
every function as well if not better). The claims are the pitch of a snake oil
salesman, who preys on insecurities: "Sure, we can't claim it will make you
successful, but can you afford NOT to take the chance that it might?"
jaybee
John McGough
<snip Jaybee's post>
Not that I want to look like a suck-up, but once again Jaybee sets the
record straight--and in such a succinct and brutaly honest way, too.
You are right, Jaybee. You don't need fancy thingamabobs to write a
screenplay. You don't even need a computer (at first at least). I wrote
my first screenplay partially by hand and partially on a typewriter. It
wasn't until I was finished with the THIRD draft that I went out to rent
a computer to make it look nice and professional. I have just started
the beginnings of my second script now and I am doing it the same exact
way. Now granted, if I owned a computer I certainly wouldn't doing
things this way, but once I do get a computer you can bet I won't be
buying silly gadgets.
Jayzel
Lou Grantt
jay...@webtv.net (John McGough) wrote:
>way. Now granted, if I owned a computer I certainly wouldn't doing
>things this way, but once I do get a computer you can bet I won't be
>buying silly gadgets.
>Jayzel
Hoo-kay. Since when can you get on the Internet with tin cans tied to
strings? Must be a helluva long string.
Lou
*********************************************************************
Lou Grantt, Editor, HOLLYWOOD SCRIPTWRITER
http://hollywoodscriptwriter.com
*********************************************************************
Wm.J.Townsend
John McGough wrote:
>
> and the fact that we get ALL 4,000+ NGs
Umm, there are over 32,000 newsgroups. More daily. -Bill
Jacques E. Bouchard
Lou Grantt wrote:
> Hoo-kay. Since when can you get on the Internet with tin cans tied to
> strings? Must be a helluva long string.
Not only that, but the bandwidth suffers considerably when birds perch
on the string.
jaybee
John McGough
Come on, Lou, don't tell me you haven't yet heard of the latest
technology called WebTV? It's an electronic box that you connect to both
your television and phone jack and allows you to access the internet via
your boob tube.
It's really great. They cost between $145 and $245 (estimate depending
whether you get WebTV Classic or WebTV Plus). Very economical for those
on a tight budget. You can do ANYTHING in terms of the Internet that a
computer can do save cutting and pasteing and uploading. The Classic
version doesn't allow for saving while the higher priced Plus version
does. The best things about WebTV are its speed in downloading, its
price, and the fact that we get ALL 4,000+ NGs. Nothing is censored; no
subscribing needed. We can also send and view graphics via email or
Newsgroups--though I tend not to since most of you all would'nt be able
to see anything outside of html code.
Check out more WebTV has to offer by going to their Web site at
www.webtv.com. They have a nifty chart there that explains everything
the boxs have to offer in more "computer geek jargon" detail.
Jayzel
[Mr. Gates, I will be sending you the bill for this ad. (Oh, by the
way... Yep, Bill Gates recently bought the company)]
John McGough
JAYZEL
(Quickly)
I just got a great idea for a new script. It's about this detective guy
who saves this girl who always gets herself in trouble and has to cry
for help all the time. I think it'd be a great vehicle for Goldie Hawn
and Mel Gibson. I'm thinking of calling it BIRD ON A STRING.
OH, wait a second....
Damn!
Jayzel
Bob Miller
Steven Sashen <sas...@cinovation.com> wrote:
>Let me say 2 things:
>
>1) Mr. Greenfield will be hearing from my attorney today.
>
>2) Here's what DID happen. When I signed up for my domain name, I also
>signed up Scriptthing.com. As you may know, after requesting a domain,
>the Internic then sends you a confirmation letter, asking if, in fact,
>you want the domain in question. I told them to CANCEL Scriptthing.com
>and I paid ONLY for Scriptware.
Well, damn, bubbly-damn. I've read through this whole back-and-forth
post, and I still come back to something you, Sashen, still have not
answered. Why the hell did you sign up your competitor's name as a
domain, regardless of whether you did the cancellation? Why? And how
would you feel if somebody had done the same with scriptware.com? Why
are "you" the one sending out lawyers, here?
Damn, bubbly-damn.
Bob
My 2 centavos' worth...
Bob Miller
bmi...@neosoft.com
Lou Grantt
jay...@webtv.net (John McGough) wrote:
>Come on, Lou, don't tell me you haven't yet heard of the latest
>technology called WebTV? It's an electronic box that you connect to both
>your television and phone jack and allows you to access the internet via
>your boob tube.
<snipped the rest of your nifty ad>
I'd forgotten about WebTV and its competitors. I wonder if its going
to actually be very popular. I'd love it if it was. I have family
members who can't afford a computer. I've been mentioning this kind
of alternative to them and hoping they'd go for it.
Glad you're finding it so useful. Thanks for the info on it. I'll go
bug my sister some more about it.
(Kinda liked the tin can idea, though.)
Jacques E. Bouchard
John McGough wrote:
> It's really great. They cost between $145 and $245 (estimate depending
> whether you get WebTV Classic or WebTV Plus). Very economical for those
> on a tight budget. You can do ANYTHING in terms of the Internet that a
> computer can do save cutting and pasteing and uploading. The Classic
> version doesn't allow for saving while the higher priced Plus version
> does. The best things about WebTV are its speed in downloading, its
> price, and the fact that we get ALL 4,000+ NGs. Nothing is censored; no
> subscribing needed.
Aren't there something like 30,000 newsgroups out there?
John, you can get access to usenet with about $150 (286 with 14.4K
modem). For about $200 more, you can probably get a computer fast enough to
run a web browser and Windows.
jaybee
John McGough
Bill said:
UMM... there are over 32,000 newsgroups.
I'm a writer, not a mathematician. <grin>
Jayzel
Wm.J.Townsend
John McGough wrote:
>
> I'm a writer, not a mathematician
In that case, the Paramount accounting department
may have a job opening for you.... -Bill
John McGough
By the way, I forgot to mention that even though you can't save things
using WebTV Classic, there is nothing stopping you from you using your
VCR to videotape your favorite Web sites. It's a "nifty" concept, ain't
it.
Best news of all--the moderator of the WebTV Newsgroup just dropped a
BIG hint today that we may be getting Windows (!!!) in a future upgrade
(WebTV offers FREE lifetime upgrades)!
God, I love technology!
Jayzel
Mike Barklage
"Wm.J.Townsend" <pm...@hotmail.com> writes:
Yeah, but they're only looking for Fantasy writers.
Mike Barklage
bark...@ucsu.colorado.edu -- MSTie #19634 -- http://rtt.colorado.edu/~barklage
"If we could just get everyone to close their eyes and visualize world peace
for an hour, imagine how serene and quiet it would be until the looting
started." -- winner of a newspaper "Deep Thoughts" contest
Bob
jay...@webtv.net (John McGough) wrote:
> They cost between $145 and $245 (estimate depending
>whether you get WebTV Classic or WebTV Plus).
I have seen them for less than $100, after rebate.
> The best things about WebTV are its speed in downloading, its
>price, and the fact that we get ALL 4,000+ NGs. Nothing is censored;
The last I noticed there were about 45,000 newsgroups.
Bob <valen at psicorps dot com>
Screenplay Systems
> Ahem. Stephen, you fail to note that what you're really talking about is
> Movie Magic and your budgeting and scheduling software, not Dramatica.
> It's a little bit of a PR fudge you guys do, and you should knock it off.
Not a fudge at all. The statement we make, which is that over 90% of
the 1996 Academy Award nominations went to production companies that use
Screenplay Systems' software is 100% accurate. Over the years, some of
those nominations used Scriptor, and I'm sure that in this year some of
those nominations used Movie Magic Screenwriter.
If we dig deep enough, we can probably find good evidence to say that
some of the productions even used Dramatica, though to what extent it's
hard to say.
We can say that Dramatica is the best-selling of the
screenplay-development software tools, however. I think in a few more
years we will be able to get more of the writers who are using it to be
more open and give quotes...
Stephen Greenfield
Screenplay System
<http://ww.screenplay.com> <http://www.dramatica.com>
Screenplay Systems
Jacques E. Bouchard" <edw...@cam.org> wrote:
> I just have to wonder: how did screenwriters and filmmakers ever manage twenty
> years ago? I mean if the software had the slightest impact on the quality of
> the finished product, wouldn't it stand to reason that movies now would be
> greatly superior?
Well, we had to retype each draft of a non-production script. It was
painful!
How has this had an impact? Primarily, word processing is a major time
saver. I guess if you put that saved time back into the script, then
you should see some impact on the quality of the finished product. I
believe this was part of the logic why the Academy of Motion Picture
Arts and Sciences gave Chris Huntley and myself a Technical Achievement
Award for the development of Scriptor.
> They prey on the novice who is already overwhelmed by the sheer
> hostility of the business and feels compelled to take every action to increase
> their odds. Meanwhile, the only people benefiting are the software companies.
Oh, come on. Our companies develop custom tools for writers in a very
specialized business. YOU try to submit a script in the improper format
and just see what happens.
Yes, we are here to help answer questions and promote our software. But
come on, in the past it has not been easy for the average writer to get
access to our knowledge and skills in the software area.
ALSO -- I am a produced screenwriter in the WGA. I am interested in
this newsgroup because I have very defined opinions about breaking in
and selling spec scripts. I haven't jumped into every thread I have an
opinion on, because I would like to sit back and see what others are
saying.
> They're glorified word processors, folks, and not very elaborate ones
> either if you look at the behemoth that MS Word has become (and which can do
> every function as well if not better).
This is not good advice. While it is true that specialized script tools
don't function well as GENERAL word processors, tools such as WORD are
not well adapted for the arcane layouts of movie scripts.
Nevertheless, it is very easy for the novice writer to test this for
themselves: try doing a half-dozen PRINTED drafts of a script in word.
Sure, WRITING the script is easy, but paginating and printing drafts, as
well as revising a production script is simply too much work. This is
the reason our companies have multi-million dollar businesses -- not
because of the "fear factor" you cite.
Furthermore, anyone can download nearly-working demos of our software
for FREE. Make the decision yourself -- if you think these tools are
overkill, then don't spend the bucks.
Jaybee, I'm afraid you're out of touch with the working writer.
Stephen Greenfield
President
Screenplay Systems, Inc.
Makers of Movie Magic Screenwriter, MM Budgeting, MM Scheduling
and Dramatica (Pro & Dreamkit)
(800) 84-STORY
<http://www.screenplay.com>
<http://www.dramatica.com>
Brian Anderson
Screenplay Systems wrote:
>
> Not a fudge at all. The statement we make, which is that over 90% of
> the 1996 Academy Award nominations went to production companies that use
> Screenplay Systems' software is 100% accurate.
I've wondered about this figure since I first saw it. How many of
those nominations are related to screenwriting? I mean, if a script is
written using Movie Master and the film is nominated for Best Original
Score, then trying to make a connection between that nomination and your
software is rather tenuous, to put it mildly.
Also, if 90% of productions use your software, and 90% of the
nominations go to productions that use your software, doesn't that
statistically prove that your software has no bearing on the quality of
the film?
I'm not trying to criticize the software -- I've never used it and
it may well be the best friend a screenwriter ever had. But the
statistics used in advertising it always struck me as questionable at
best. And you know the old saying: lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Earlier you wrote:
> a Dramatica
> user... won The Saltzburg Screenplay competition, and they
> complimented his structure, which was Dramatica-developed.
If a screenwriter already has a director taking credit for his work,
what does he need your software for?
Keith M. Lucas
In article <349dc125...@news.mindspring.com>,
And WebTV still doesn't have them all. They don't get demon.*, they
don't get magic.*, they don't get excession.*...
And most of all, they've got the same problem AOL has only more so..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sillywizATexcessionDOTdemonDOTcoDOTuk"It's not a personality..it's a bulldozer"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Great boiling hell, Jones, what happened ?" "Er.. I think my pants exploded."
---------------------------------------------------------- Captain Star -------
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>> Ahem. Stephen, you fail to note that what you're really talking about is
>> Movie Magic and your budgeting and scheduling software, not Dramatica.
>> It's a little bit of a PR fudge you guys do, and you should knock it off.
>Not a fudge at all. The statement we make, which is that over 90% of
>the 1996 Academy Award nominations went to production companies that use
>Screenplay Systems' software is 100% accurate. Over the years, some of
>those nominations used Scriptor, and I'm sure that in this year some of
>those nominations used Movie Magic Screenwriter.
>If we dig deep enough, we can probably find good evidence to say that
>some of the productions even used Dramatica, though to what extent it's
>hard to say.
>We can say that Dramatica is the best-selling of the
>screenplay-development software tools, however. I think in a few more
>years we will be able to get more of the writers who are using it to be
>more open and give quotes...
>Stephen Greenfield
Nothing like good, hard, facts to back up your claims.
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>Jacques E. Bouchard" <edw...@cam.org> wrote:
>> They're glorified word processors, folks, and not very elaborate ones
>> either if you look at the behemoth that MS Word has become (and which can do
>> every function as well if not better).
>This is not good advice. While it is true that specialized script tools
>don't function well as GENERAL word processors, tools such as WORD are
>not well adapted for the arcane layouts of movie scripts.
Oh, come on, Stephen, "arcane"? Really? There are some basics that
anyone can learn, and the rest is "keep it simple and evocative." Any
major word processor can be set up to do 80-90% of what the dedicated
softwares do. You want it all done for you, out of the box, then go
with a dedicated screenwriting program.
Melvakian
>Subject: Re: To Mr. Sashen: Is this true???
>From: Steven Sashen <sas...@cinovation.com>
>Date: Mon, Dec 15, 1997 14:04 EST
>Message-id: <34957F...@cinovation.com>
>
>2) Here's what DID happen. When I signed up for my domain >name, I also signed
up Scriptthing.com.
Aha! Which BEGS the question: W H Y ????
W H O at ScriptThing authorized YOU to do this????
Is this NOT what started this entire PROBLEM????
>Rather than taking the simple actions required to acquire the >domain, Mr.
Shafer and Mr. Greenfield repeatedly
>misrepresented my intentions and my actions while trying to >make Mr. Shafer
out to be some sort of victim.
What an absurd, assinine statement!!
Mr. Shafer IS the victim!!! YOU, by your own admission,
TOOK HIS COMPANY WEB ADDRESS!
Without his permission!
Without any EXPLANATION!
And you have the GALL to claim that Mr. Shafer and Mr.
Greenfield have "repeatedly misrepresented your intentions
and actions"???
Okay -- I'll bite --- WHAT WERE YOUR INTENTIONS???
>Hope that clears it up.
Not even close. Answer the following questions and maybe it will be:
1. WHY did you take the "scriptthing.com" web site when it wasn't yours to
take?
2. WHO at ScriptThing authorized you to take the web site name?
Go for it, Mr. Sashen.
YM
Jacques E. Bouchard
Screenplay Systems wrote:
> Well, we had to retype each draft of a non-production script. It was
> painful!
>
> How has this had an impact? Primarily, word processing is a major time
> saver. I guess if you put that saved time back into the script, then
> you should see some impact on the quality of the finished product. I
> believe this was part of the logic why the Academy of Motion Picture
> Arts and Sciences gave Chris Huntley and myself a Technical Achievement
> Award for the development of Scriptor.
But we're not talking about mere word processors here, are we?
> Oh, come on. Our companies develop custom tools for writers in a very
> specialized business. YOU try to submit a script in the improper format
> and just see what happens.
I use proper formats; it's called "styles" in Word. No need for specialized
software there.
> This is not good advice. While it is true that specialized script tools
> don't function well as GENERAL word processors, tools such as WORD are
> not well adapted for the arcane layouts of movie scripts.
Not out of the box, but it can be adapted to perform any task.
> Jaybee, I'm afraid you're out of touch with the working writer.
That would require complicated contortion on my part.
jaybee
Screenplay Systems
Brian Anderson <socr...@flash.net> wrote:
> if 90% of productions use your software, and 90% of the
> nominations go to productions that use your software, doesn't that
> statistically prove that your software has no bearing on the quality of
> the film?
Our intent by using that figure is to indicate that the top level of the
Hollywood mainstreem uses our tools. Obviously, budgeting software
doesn't have significant creative impact as to what gets filmed. But it
does indicate that a lot of top people are using the software.
> > a Dramatica
> > user... won The Saltzburg Screenplay competition, and they
> > complimented his structure, which was Dramatica-developed.
>
> If a screenwriter already has a director taking credit for his work,
> what does he need your software for?
Sorry Brian, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Perhaps you
misunderstood what I posted, which indicated that a SCREENWRITER, who is
a user of our Dramatica software, won first place in a screenwriting
competition. No director involved yet.
Screenplay Systems
xab...@juno.com (Brevity) wrote:
>Nothing like good, hard, facts to back up your claims.
Well, here's another Sashen story that's directly related:
Mr. Sashen contacted the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to
complain about our "claim". They contacted me with the standard letter,
which as one might expect questioned our right to use the Academy's name
in advertising.
Then, without my knowledge, Steven Sashen obtained copies of the
Academy's private correspondence with my company, which he then promptly
forwarded to the Federal Trade Commission and the NAD (National
Advertising Division of the BBB).
Very quickly, within a few days, I was able to pull up prevailing case
law in California which demonstrated I had a right to the "Nominative
Fair Use" of the Academy's names for my claims. I discussed my
tabulation methodology with the Academy, and they choose not to pursue
it any further. Essentially, they did not have a problem with my
claims.
Then, the FTC and NAD also looked at my claims. I discussed our
tabulation methodology, AND offered to send them exact tabulations.
They declined to examine any more materials, because they were satisfied
with the numbers in my claims. All the parties then informed Mr. Sashen
that he didn't have any legitimate cause that they would be interested
in pursuing.
So, you see, I have been able to demonstrate the validity of my claims
with "good, hard facts". But obviously, I'm not going to do that on the
internet, nor am I going to do it in any environment that allows a
competitor to determine who my clients are.
Ironically, the 85% figure Sashen was complaining about was wrong. It
turned out to be 91% when we carefully recalculated it for 1996.
Once again, anyone who knows my company, and knows our product line, has
no hesitation in understanding why we can make such an agresssive claim.
Screenplay Systems
xab...@juno.com (Brevity) wrote:
> Any
> major word processor can be set up to do 80-90% of what the dedicated
> softwares do. You want it all done for you, out of the box, then go
> with a dedicated screenwriting program.
Sure, I agree. But that 10%-20% can be a real time consuming job.
Bottom line: if you're only writing one script a year, and not
constantly putting out drafts, AND 1) you are willing to either spend a
lot of time hand-paginating or 2) you are willing to break format, then
a good word processor will do just fine.
But if you're like me, and you do a lot of drafts on several projects,
then the amount of time wasted doing this stuff by hand is valuable time
lost. Considering most people spend a decent amount on a computer and
printer, why not have software designed to handle the druge work?
Screenplay Systems
Jacques E. Bouchard" <edw...@cam.org> wrote:
> I use proper formats; it's called "styles" in Word. No need for
> specialized software there.
Hey, if it works for you, great. Don't fix what isn't broken. But
don't assume that other writers feel the same way. Especially prolific
writers.
And it's not just margins, but dialog breaks and continued. Last time I
checked, Word styles don't handle that.
Yeah, I know -- you can do that by hand. Have fun doing that for 120
pages. Draft after draft. And if you choose to not break dialog? Your
script could be 10-15 pages longer. If you write short scripts this may
not be a problem for you. But it will leave a lot of blank space at the
bottom of your page, which will give away that fact, and which may or
may not be important to the reader.
Also, I don;t know about you but my scripts are typically 130 pages
long. I can't afford another 10 pages due to lax page breaking.
Jacques E. Bouchard
Screenplay Systems wrote:
> Hey, if it works for you, great. Don't fix what isn't broken. But
> don't assume that other writers feel the same way. Especially prolific
> writers.
Here you go again, hinting that prolific writers have to buy your snake
oil, and those who don't are amateurs. It's twice in this exchange now.
Have you ever sold used cars before?
jaybee
BetterDuck
This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
purchase of ScriptThing.
In my not so humble opinion the program sucks, it is by far the worst
program I have ever paid for! Not only do I have to print my scrpits
one-page-at-a-time, but I sent an e-mail to the jag off thats name is
in the back of the manual, only to have someone reply that I have to call
their tech support number. Well the makers of ScriptThing obviously have
me confused with some west coast mark, so I spared the afternoon in jail
I would have receieved had I spoke to the office mice over at ScriptThing.
Hey SCRIPTHING you suck! You rob me of $135.00 for this piece of gub. Keep
your punk asses out west where you belong, if you were around here you
could check my statistics on m.f.'s that have robbed me of $135.00 and that
don't play. What an asswhipe I am for shelling out $135.00 for this lousy
piece of shit. I was expecting something damn fucking grand for $135.00 instead
I got some half ass program that I have to manually print out pages one at a fucking
time. Then comes the Title page. I read the manual, did the steps and I
end up with shit! SCRIPTHING sucks! Then comes the spell checker, I turn it off
then it re-spells shit anyway. SCRIPTTHING sucks.
So hey SCRIPTTHING, I got one word for you 'WAREZ' bitch. I would have been pissed
if I would have paid five dollars for that program and still had the problems I do.
One hundred and thirty five dollars for a disk. You have got to be kidding me.
Well what do they say? Once burned or whatever. Now I got a kid that gets warez for
me, heck he even gets em for his probation officer. I oughta put class action
suit on your monkey asses 'cept I aint got no civil rights for the time being.
This is whats refered to as 'never forgive action' I will root for your demise
until you fall, you can count on that. Now that Im reminded of how you robbed
me, I am going to put up a diatribe on my website, that receives 15,000 hits a
day, and I am gonna dis your company like you dissed me. The moment you took
the $135.00 off my credit card you made an enemy for life, there is nothing
you can do or say now that will change this fact.
My cable company over charged my mom once, so I put so much pressure on the city manager
that he voided the cities contract with the cable company and got a new one.
Then the cable company's director of operations wanted to sit with me and talk
about it....I smacked him in his face for stealing from my mother.
The next time you decide to rob a filmmaker make sure he isnt a zillion
times madder than Oliver Stone, with a zillion less to lose.
You play with the Duck, you get the Bill.
Better Duck
BetterDuck
Bob Miller wrote:
>
>
> Lordy, lordy, lordy, Duck. Email them your phone number, and tell them
> to call you. They did that for me. And their tech support guy, Igor,
> is very good and very responsive.
>
> Puzzled why you're having problems -- I think Script Thing is the
> greatest program since sliced bread. I got the Windows version; maybe
> it's different than the version you have, but I've been real happy
> with it, and I'm pretty damned critical of software if it mucks up.
>
> Email Igor -- have 'im call you!
>
> Bob
Bob, thanks for info. I might have been a little too drunk last
night when I went off on the tirade on ShitThing. I would try your
advice; however, I have since obtained other screenwriting programs
that didn't cost $135.00(DOS)
hey ScriptThing!!!...WAREZ Do You Want To Go Today?
Notorious D.U.C.K.
BetterDuck
Bob Logan wrote:
>
> BetterDuck wrote in message <67rliv$h...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>...
> >
> >Bob, thanks for info. I might have been a little too drunk last
> >night when I went off on the tirade on ShitThing.
>
>
> I both use and love ScriptThing.
>
> I used ScriptThing on seven screenplays so far, and on two
> of the movies I directed.
Bob, yeah I use it, and have written 12 feature length scripts with it.
The thing that bothers me is that it doesnt print the WAY I want it to...
so I have to import my scripts into Wordperfect to get them onto paper...
BetterDuck
Screenplay Systems wrote:
>
> BetterDuck <CMay...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > Not only do I have to print my scrpits
> > one-page-at-a-time,
>
> ScriptThing is the program used by DreamWorks, and it has been tested
> against all the other programs.
Dear Mr. Greenfield, I'm amazed that you have got your peanut butter
all in my chocolate. First off, name dropping is about as as pointless as
naming ass pimples. You know why? Cause if Dreamworks would have had the
problem I have had, it would have been fixed that friggen day. The fact
that Mr. Speilberg isn't Mr. Duck is why guys like moi get dicked
around, and big wig studio moguls get their balls coddled.
>
> In any case, Ken Schafer is a decent guy who takes a lot of pride in his
> work, so I am also surprised he couldn;t help you resolve the problem.
Hey I'm sure Mr. Schafer is a decent guy, the thing is I'm not. Not when
it comes to my money. I knew as much about him, as he knew about me
at the time I purchased the program, zero. Call me old fashioned but
lawsuits, and complaints to the BBB aren't my thing. Since $135.00 takes
alot longer for me to make than it does Speilberg or Geffen, I get that
much more pissed off when I get robbed.
Not only did I buy this program that has been a headache but since
I get mail with your products listed for sale, I can only begin to
speculate that Mr. Schafer sold my personal information to you.
You guys are cute, if you knew me it would be alot different.
I'm not gonna posture and preach "better then thou" in fact its
probably the exact opposite. You guys are probably decent fellows
that work hard, to provide products to this specialized field.
On the contrary I am always in trouble. I have more enemies than friends.
This discusion is over, cause I must move on. If computer programing
was my game, maybe it would be worth my while but its not.
I got films to make and people to piss off. Get in line...
> If there's any way I can help please contact me directly.
I dont need any help, why don't you call up DreamWorks and see if
they need any....
I may have to print my scripts one page at a time, but at least
nobody is suing my ass for 10 million, damn you West Coast people
get into alot of shit.
whistlin' Dixie
Better Duck
BetterDuck
KenSchafer wrote:
>
> You wrote...
>
> >>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
> purchase of ScriptThing.<<
>
> guarantee that we stand by 100%. I'd MUCH rather give someone their money back
> than have them unhappy, for whatever the reason.
>
> Concerning your being told to call our tech support number when you e-mailed us
> with a problem, some types of problems really require that you be at the
> computer so that we can work with you in an interactive manner and try to
> figure out exactly what is causing the problem.
You got all the answers today, they got a name for it....round these in
here parts we refer to it as "coming out of the woodwork" Since I aint
seen your name on this newsgroup before I guess you came round this m.f.
for me. Well, homes...it aint like that. Your about as significant to
this newsgroup as wood. I didnt post my problems so you could show
up like the Red Cross after hurricane Andrew. I posted it cause alot
of people in this newsgroup are ignorant, and I laid the facts out the
way I see em.
All your sucking up now reminds me of Tyson/Holyfield 2, you just
got abused, and tossed to the mat infront of all your fans and
now you want to bite my ear off? I DON"T WANT A REFUND!!!! I want
a screenwriting program that is PERFECT, like me. Is that too
much to ask? When you got a program, that I don't have to call you
on the phone to figure out how to operate, let me know. Till then -
the "duck season-rabbit season" banter bores this group.
> In any case, I'm sorry the program has not worked out for you, but please call
> our 800-450-9450 number and arrange to ship the software back to us and we'll
> give you your money back. As we would have even had you NOT flamed us.
I didnt flame you to try and get a refund! I did it because you have
made my life a living hell...just call me the anti-Gherig "Today I feel
like the unluckiest Duck in the world" I add these cynical barbs so
that the minority of people that read these posts are able to realize
that Im not preaching the gospel of screenwriter software do's and don'ts.
> To anyone else considering buying scriptwriting software, please feel free to
> download a working demo from our website:
> Click on DEMOS and download either the DOS or WINDOWS demos and see the program
> for yourself. Both demos ARE the actual programs with certain features (such
> as exporting and printed) limited or disabled.
Now we are cooking with fire, baby. At the time I purchased your program
the PRINT option was disabled right or wrong??
living one-page-at-a-time
Better Duck
Bob Joesting
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
> While it is true that specialized script tools
>don't function well as GENERAL word processors,
>tools such as WORD are not well adapted for the
>arcane layouts of movie scripts.
As has been pointed out in another post, there
isn't much needed beyond a few simple rules to deal
with "the arcane layouts of movie scripts." The
place that specialized script software becomes all
but essential is, as Stephen points out, when working
with the complexities and revisions of a production
script. Most new writers have no need for software
beyond any standard word processor with a few macros.
For those who have some proficiency with computers
this is easy. For those who are new to computers and
have no other need for a general word processor, it
may be enough easier to learn the special purpose
software to be worth it.
Bob Joesting <va...@psicorps.com>
RobtJonz
IMHO, despite its occasional faults, I loooove ScriptThing. Let the bullets
fly, mes amis.
If you've got at least 2 years of professional, post-academic, computer
experience, please bookmark http://edpcs.com to check out the latest jobs for
computer professionals!!
Brevity
Screenplay Systems <S...@Screenplay.com> wrote:
>So, you see, I have been able to demonstrate the validity of my claims
>with "good, hard facts". But obviously, I'm not going to do that on the
>internet, nor am I going to do it in any environment that allows a
>competitor to determine who my clients are.
>Stephen Greenfield
Yes, the people to whom you advertise don't deserve an explanation.
All we need to see are vague claims and another knock to your
competitor. Makes sense to me.
Ever been involed in political advertising?
Chuck Atkins
On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 01:02:57 -0800, BetterDuck
<CMay...@worldnet.att.net> opined:
>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
>purchase of ScriptThing.
>
>In my not so humble opinion the program sucks, it is by far the worst
>program I have ever paid for!
<<much typically misspelled ranting deleted>>
Hey, Duck, ScriptThing works great for me. Try reading the manual.
Bob Miller
chu...@NO.primenet.com.SPAM (Chuck Atkins) wrote:
I would also have to agree that ScriptThing is one of the better
writing programs that I have tried, and I demo-ed most of them.
Bob
My 2 centavos' worth...
Bob Miller
bmi...@neosoft.com
Bob Miller
BetterDuck <CMay...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
>purchase of ScriptThing.
>
>In my not so humble opinion the program sucks, it is by far the worst
>program I have ever paid for! Not only do I have to print my scrpits
>one-page-at-a-time, but I sent an e-mail to the jag off thats name is
>in the back of the manual, only to have someone reply that I have to call
>their tech support number.
Lordy, lordy, lordy, Duck. Email them your phone number, and tell them
to call you. They did that for me. And their tech support guy, Igor,
is very good and very responsive.
Puzzled why you're having problems -- I think Script Thing is the
greatest program since sliced bread. I got the Windows version; maybe
it's different than the version you have, but I've been real happy
with it, and I'm pretty damned critical of software if it mucks up.
Email Igor -- have 'im call you!
Bob
Screenplay Systems
BetterDuck <CMay...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Not only do I have to print my scrpits
> one-page-at-a-time,
I'm amazed that you have some of the problems you've mentioned.
ScriptThing is the program used by DreamWorks, and it has been tested
against all the other programs.
As Movie Magic Screenwriter is very similar (though there are some
differences) I have to say I've never heard of the problem you describe.
There is no reason I know of why you should have to print a page at a
time, unless the communication link to your printer isn't working
properly. It may be a hardware problem (yes, sometimes it IS hardware).
In any case, Ken Schafer is a decent guy who takes a lot of pride in his
work, so I am also surprised he couldn;t help you resolve the problem.
If there's any way I can help please contact me directly.
Stephen Greenfield
President
Screenplay Systems, Inc.
S...@Screenplay.com
Screenplay Systems
va...@psicorps.com (Bob Joesting) wrote:
>Most new writers have no need for software
>beyond any standard word processor with a few macros.
And let me say it again: the more drafts you PRINT to be read by
professionals in the biz, the more critical specialized software
becomes. It's just a timesaver -- but for people who re-draft, it's a
big timesaver.
I do particularly resent the notion that I have somehow pulled the wool
over 20,000 writers in my company's 15-year history. Somehow, Jaybee is
smarter than all of them, including the ones who wrote their first
script with our software and are now working professionals. That
somehow I pulled the wool over the Academy and Scriptor didn't deserve a
Technical Acheivement Award.
I don't quarrel with anyone who wants to do the pagination by hand. If
I were printing one draft a year and had never been produced, I might
feel the same.
Bob Logan
BetterDuck wrote in message <67rliv$h...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>...
>
>Bob, thanks for info. I might have been a little too drunk last
>night when I went off on the tirade on ShitThing.
One man's shit is another man's right arm.
I both use and love ScriptThing.
I used ScriptThing on seven screenplays so far, and on two
of the movies I directed.
Wouldn't use any thing else.
Bob Logan
Loganworks Ltd.
Bob Logan
Bob Miller wrote in message <34a115e...@fullnews.neosoft.com>...
>chu...@NO.primenet.com.SPAM (Chuck Atkins) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 01:02:57 -0800, BetterDuck
>><CMay...@worldnet.att.net> opined:
>>
>>>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
>>>purchase of ScriptThing.
>>>
>>>In my not so humble opinion the program sucks, it is by far the worst
>>>program I have ever paid for!
>>
>><<much typically misspelled ranting deleted>>
>>
>>Hey, Duck, ScriptThing works great for me. Try reading the manual.
>
>I would also have to agree that ScriptThing is one of the better
>writing programs that I have tried, and I demo-ed most of them.
>
ScriptThing is THE best program that I have ever used.
Ever.
Bob Logan
Loganworks Ltd.
KenSchafer
You wrote...
>>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
purchase of ScriptThing.<<
If you're so unhappy, why haven't you taken us up on our published money back
guarantee that we stand by 100%. I'd MUCH rather give someone their money back
than have them unhappy, for whatever the reason.
Concerning your being told to call our tech support number when you e-mailed us
with a problem, some types of problems really require that you be at the
computer so that we can work with you in an interactive manner and try to
figure out exactly what is causing the problem.
In any case, I'm sorry the program has not worked out for you, but please call
our 800-450-9450 number and arrange to ship the software back to us and we'll
give you your money back. As we would have even had you NOT flamed us.
To anyone else considering buying scriptwriting software, please feel free to
download a working demo from our website:
www.ScriptPerfection.com OR
(finally) www.ScriptThing.com.
Click on DEMOS and download either the DOS or WINDOWS demos and see the program
for yourself. Both demos ARE the actual programs with certain features (such
as exporting and printed) limited or disabled.
In the the Windows demo you can actually write up to 40 pages per script,
saving it as you go. If you decide to buy the program, we can "unlock" those
pages so that anything you've written so far in the demo is immediately
available. If you decide NOT to buy the program at that point, we will EXPORT
one script per person to most major word processing programs so that you can
use what you've written in whatever other program you've made the choice to
use.
Finally, concerning those people who loudly proclaim that you don't need
scriptwriting software; you're absolutely right, you don't NEED it, just as you
don't NEED a spreadsheet program or even a computer for that matter. Isn't it
SHANE BLACK who has stocked up on typewriters against the day that they're no
longer produced? But I don't understand why you're so loudly vocal against us,
the producers of such software.
To the best of my knowlege ALL of us (ScriptThing, Scriptware, Final Draft,
Movie Magic Screenwriter et al.) offer both demos and money back guarantees.
We're not ripping anyone off. If people find our software worth the money,
great for both of us. If they're happy with MS Word, fine.
We're supplying a product that I personally think can make script writing go
MUCH faster and easier, and I'm a writer myself (Star Trek:TNG "The Minds Eye")
and I spent four years as a script coordinator doing production but each to
their own.
Ken Schafer
ScriptPerfection Enterprises, Inc.
Screenplay Systems
BetterDuck <CMay...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> You know why? Cause if Dreamworks would have had the
> problem I have had, it would have been fixed that friggen day. The fact
> that Mr. Speilberg isn't Mr. Duck is why guys like moi get dicked
> around, and big wig studio moguls get their balls coddled.
Hey -- I take every problem that ANY client has as "serious". And so
does my staff. Wasn't always that way, but over the years, we've
learned that the customer is #1. Period. And Frankly, I don't care if
you're some unproduced sleezebag writer with $10 to your name or James
Cameron -- I'll treat you EXACTLY the same. In fact, you'll probably
get treated slightly better than Cameron.
> since
> I get mail with your products listed for sale, I can only begin to
> speculate that Mr. Schafer sold my personal information to you.
Wrong, El Ducko. Mr. Schafer hasn't sold any of his client lists to
me. You're just on some writing list -- one of the many we use.
> Hey I'm sure Mr. Schafer is a decent guy, the thing is I'm not
Yeah, I'm, getting that picture. You got some kinda attitude thing
going on. But you still have a right to have your software work
correctly. As I offered before, I'm sure I can help sort out your
problem (the software one) if you're interested.
But as you can see from the response of other folks on this newsgroup,
Ken Schafer and his product have a great deal of respect. I'm sorry
you've had problems.
(if you reply, CC my e-mail address, S...@screenplay.com, since I may not
have access to my news server over the weekend and I'm not sure how fast
these messages roll off)
Screenplay Systems
Betterduck wrote:
> Bob, yeah I use it, and have written 12 feature length scripts with it.
> The thing that bothers me is that it doesnt print the WAY I want it to...
>
> so I have to import my scripts into Wordperfect to get them onto paper...
Here's another thought: just as a test, try downloading the DEMO
version of Movie Magic Screenwriter that is on our web site. See if it
has the same printing problems. If it does, then perhaps my tech
support department can help. In any case, we may be able to figure out
what's going on.
That DEMO does everything -- including print (albiet with a watermark),
but you can SAVE and work in decent-sized files. Enter three pages of
bla bla and see if you have the same printing problem.
The demo is at: <http://www.screenplay.com/Sales/Demo_Page/index.html>
Rich Wilson
BetterDuck wrote:
> [snip]
> In my not so humble opinion the program sucks, it is by far the worst
> one-page-at-a-time, [snip]
Hi Chip,
I'm not a tech support expert and I'm not paid to do it, but I'd like to help
-- and as you know, I didn't just crawl out from the woodwork. ;-)
First, I'm not sure what you mean by printing one page at a time. If you
mean that the software will not accept -- and act on -- a command to print the
entire file, or to print a range of several pages without your intervention,
that is abnormal in the extreme, and NOT the way the program works.
I've used the DOS version of ScriptThing on a 386, and the Windows
version on a Pentium, with two or three different printers, and nothing like
this ever arose. I've never heard the issue raised by any other screenwriters
either, and I've been frequenting writers' forums online for years -- not to
mention getting feedback from people reading my online reviews on my website.
That's a LOT of input, and *none* of it reporting such a problem. So --
sorry to say this -- the situation is probably specific to your installation,
something about the interaction among your hardware and other software, etc.
Maybe you already know this, but printer drivers are very tricky, and
they can interfere with a lot of stuff. Even your *video* driver could be
interfering, or your hard disk controller, or your even a screen saver if you
use one. Basically, you should be yelling instead at *Microsoft* for never
making a proper operating system for the "modern" PC, but instead keeping
users stuck in Installation Hell all these years.
Anyway, I'm not here to "defend" Ken or Stephen or anybody. Leave them
out of it. Let's just talk about the tool itself. Let's talk *software only*.
I assure you, I have personal acquaintance with two other people who,
like me, are very picky reviewers with years of experience with TONS of
scriptwriting software. We've all three put this program to the acid test.
None of us uncovered any printing problems with ScriptThing or MMSW, and
all of us found it to be a good product worth using. (So have other reviewers,
I just don't know them personally!)
So if you want to write personal slams about Ken, or Stephen, or Don
King, I think it's a waste of time and not totally fair to them. No, wait --
correction: go ahead and slam Don King all you want.
But *IF you want to print screenplays using a perfectly fine program you
already paid for*, you need to talk to tech support. That's what I have to do
if I run into unusual problems, and have done so for years. It pays off. Sure,
everybody would like a perfect OOBE (out-of-box-experience) but it doesn't
always happen for 100% of all users. That's a fact of life in software.
You are at point A, and normal printing is at point B; a phone call to
tech support is the best, and probably only, way for you to get from point A
to point B. So, pease give it a try, because it's in *your* interest to get
the thing working.
If not, get your money back and try something else. But let's drop the
noise and get down to bizniss. I hate seeing you waste your time like this.
No b.s.,
Rich Wilson
http://www.communicator.com
P.S. In case anybody's wondering, I also think Scriptware and FinalDraft are
fine products. I'm not playing favorites here. And as visitors to my site have
found out, I also endorse using word processors alone if you want. The point
is screenwriting, and software is just a tool, a means to an end. That's all.
Chuck Atkins
On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 20:34:48 -0800, BetterDuck
<CMay...@worldnet.att.net> opined:
>KenSchafer wrote:
>>
>> Concerning your being told to call our tech support number when you e-mailed us
>> with a problem, some types of problems really require that you be at the
>> computer so that we can work with you in an interactive manner and try to
>> figure out exactly what is causing the problem.
>
>You got all the answers today, they got a name for it....round these in
>here parts we refer to it as "coming out of the woodwork" Since I aint
>seen your name on this newsgroup before I guess you came round this m.f.
>for me.
Hey, moron, Ken's been posting in here longer than you have. And far
more intelligently, too.
>Well, homes...it aint like that.
You mean "Holmes." For a guy who tries to throw slang as much as you
do, you should at least know what you're trying to say.
>Your about as significant to this newsgroup as wood. I didnt post my problems so you could show
>up like the Red Cross after hurricane Andrew. I posted it cause alot
>of people in this newsgroup are ignorant, and I laid the facts out the
>way I see em.
Myopically, as always. You bitched, Ken offered your money back. If
you don't take it, you're a bigger idiot than you seem.
>I DON"T WANT A REFUND!!!!
See my previous paragraph.
>I want a screenwriting program that is PERFECT, like me.
Well, gee, if it's behaving the way you say it is, I'd say it's a
perfect match.
>Now we are cooking with fire, baby. At the time I purchased your program
>the PRINT option was disabled right or wrong??
You're printing, right? Then wrong, moron.
>living one-page-at-a-time
I've read the "scripts" you posted to your webpage.
One-page-at-a-time is no great loss to the world.
BetterDuck
Jacques E. Bouchard wrote:
>
> I don't know whether I am smarter
> than the people who use your program, since I've never met them. But you do
> seem to have an awful insecurity complex about this.
Jaybee, everyone in this newsgroup is smarter than I am. Just ask em...
Better Duck
also known as moron!
Gary Pollard
Works perfectly for me.
Gary
Chuck Atkins wrote in message <34a0b86c....@news.primenet.com>...
>On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 01:02:57 -0800, BetterDuck
><CMay...@worldnet.att.net> opined:
>
>>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
>>purchase of ScriptThing.
>>
>>In my not so humble opinion the program sucks, it is by far the worst
>>program I have ever paid for!
>
Gary Pollard
Better Duck
Ken HAS been around here before, whether you've seen him or not.
ScriptThing works superbly for me, and for many others here. I have
Scriptware on my computer too, but I use it much less.
And on the one occasion I needed it, I got EXCELLENT technical support.
I thought the offer in the previous post was reasonable enough. The print
option should not be disabled on a legitimately bought copy as far as I
know.
Gary
BetterDuck wrote in message <67sb5i$c...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>KenSchafer wrote:
>>
>> You wrote...
>>
>> >>This is gonna be the second time I have "gone off" on my ignorant ass
>> purchase of ScriptThing.<<
>>
>> If you're so unhappy, why haven't you taken us up on our published money
back
>> guarantee that we stand by 100%. I'd MUCH rather give someone their
money back
>> than have them unhappy, for whatever the reason.
>
>
>>
>> Concerning your being told to call our tech support number when you
e-mailed us
>> with a problem, some types of problems really require that you be at the
>> computer so that we can work with you in an interactive manner and try to
>> figure out exactly what is causing the problem.
>
>You got all the answers today, they got a name for it....round these in
>here parts we refer to it as "coming out of the woodwork" Since I aint
>seen your name on this newsgroup before I guess you came round this m.f.
>for me. Well, homes...it aint like that. Your about as significant to
>this newsgroup as wood. I didnt post my problems so you could show
>up like the Red Cross after hurricane Andrew. I posted it cause alot
>of people in this newsgroup are ignorant, and I laid the facts out the
>way I see em.
>
>All your sucking up now reminds me of Tyson/Holyfield 2, you just
>got abused, and tossed to the mat infront of all your fans and
>now you want to bite my ear off? I DON"T WANT A REFUND!!!! I want
>a screenwriting program that is PERFECT, like me. Is that too
>much to ask? When you got a program, that I don't have to call you
>on the phone to figure out how to operate, let me know. Till then -
>the "duck season-rabbit season" banter bores this group.
>
>> In any case, I'm sorry the program has not worked out for you, but please
call
>> our 800-450-9450 number and arrange to ship the software back to us and
we'll
>> give you your money back. As we would have even had you NOT flamed us.
>
>I didnt flame you to try and get a refund! I did it because you have
>made my life a living hell...just call me the anti-Gherig "Today I feel
>like the unluckiest Duck in the world" I add these cynical barbs so
>that the minority of people that read these posts are able to realize
>that Im not preaching the gospel of screenwriter software do's and don'ts.
>
>
>> To anyone else considering buying scriptwriting software, please feel
free to
>> download a working demo from our website:
>> Click on DEMOS and download either the DOS or WINDOWS demos and see the
program
>> for yourself. Both demos ARE the actual programs with certain features
(such
>> as exporting and printed) limited or disabled.
>
>Now we are cooking with fire, baby. At the time I purchased your program
>the PRINT option was disabled right or wrong??
>
>living one-page-at-a-time
>
>Better Duck
Jacques E. Bouchard
Screenplay Systems wrote:
> I do particularly resent the notion that I have somehow pulled the wool
> over 20,000 writers in my company's 15-year history. Somehow, Jaybee is
> smarter than all of them, including the ones who wrote their first
> script with our software and are now working professionals. That
> somehow I pulled the wool over the Academy and Scriptor didn't deserve a
> Technical Acheivement Award.
There we go again with the shameless plugs and name-dropping. And this
is exactly what I object to, but you're so damn tied up in your pre-recorded
sales pitch that you don't even listen. I don't know whether I am smarter
than the people who use your program, since I've never met them. But you do
seem to have an awful insecurity complex about this.
> I don't quarrel with anyone who wants to do the pagination by hand. If
> I were printing one draft a year and had never been produced, I might
> feel the same.
Tell me how you WOULD feel selling scripts without your software? Maybe
then you can relate to my situation. Otherwise, you're clueless. This
obsession with putting down anyone not using your software as amateurs and
part-timers is really, really insulting and a glaring lack of
professionalism. Your snide remarks are the kind of quotes that kill
companies like yours. Remember that everything you post is archived for
posterity at Dejanews.
jaybee
Bob Logan
>Bob Logan wrote:
>>
>> I used ScriptThing on seven screenplays so far, and on two
>> of the movies I directed.
>
>Bob, yeah I use it, and have written 12 feature length scripts with it.
>The thing that bothers me is that it doesnt print the WAY I want it
to...
>so I have to import my scripts into Wordperfect to get them onto
paper...
With all respect, Chip (and I mean this with all sincerity), if the vast
majority are not having the problems that you are with the software,
it seems obvious that you are the exception, and not the rule. And,
being the exception, I suspect that there is either a mechanical
problem of some sort with your computer and/or printer, or a
configuration problem.
This means that he can be worked out.
I understand you frustration, but I, along with literally dozens of my
fellow writer/filmmaker friends swear by ScriptThing.
I suggest contacting Ken Schafer at: kensc...@aol.com and
air out your problem. Either he or Igor (a terrific tech man) will
assist you. I have no doubt.
Bob Logan
Loganworks Ltd.
Rich Wilson
BetterDuck wrote:
>
> Rich, thanks for trying to help. The best way I can put it is like this.
>
> When I go to print the "entire script"
>
> I can never get a Title page but thats another worry all together.
>
> Page One - prints fine.
>
> Then page two begins printing at the very top of the paper ignoring
> the margins, thus leaving a larger margin at the bottom.
>
> This gets worse as each each succesive page prints.
>
> This doesnt happen with any of the other "word processors" I use.
>
> I have tried using the "printThing" program so I can attempt it
> on another computer with another printer and then it spits out
> blank pages that only have (continued) at the top of them in
> between the other pages.
>
> I have the (DOS) version and use it on a computer dedicated for
> writing. I have tried executing it from windows as well as from a C:\
> prompt.
>
> Chip Van Mayhugh
> Better Duck
Gary P. has made a good suggestion about checking the paper length.
Of course, you would have to have had to change that setting yourself, since
the program should default to a standard U.S. paper size. It's worth
checking (see below).
This sounds like a possible printer driver issue. As far as I recall, the
DOS version calculated page lengths on a line-count basis, and assumed that
the user was using a standard 12-point font, at 6 lines per inch. Ken can
correct me if I'm misremembering this or not describing it correctly.
Anyway, to get from the bottom of one page one to the top of the next, older
DOS programs generally did one of two things: issue a formfeed command
(ASCII 15, I *think*); or just count up and issue enough line feeds (ASCII
13, I *think*) to automatically reach the end of the page and then move down
the second page.
As you can tell, this is based on the concept of line printers, like the old
dot matrix and daisy-wheel printers. Laser printers, and I believe most/all
inkjets, are page-oriented, and they require a PDL (page description
language) to take the computer's output, and translate that into the
commands the printer needs to generate a full page at a time. Adobe's
"Postscript," and Hewlett-Packard's "PCL" are the best-known PDLs. Other
brands of printer generally emulate one or the other, sometimes both.
If the printer has its own, proprietary PDL or other method, it may require
some fiddling. Sometimes one can get printing fixed simply be changing to
the driver for some other brand of printer. Since my printer emulates HP
PCL+, I could (if needed) tell the computer that I was using an HP LJ III,
and my output would be the same as it is now, with its own custom drivers.
You've already said that your printer works with other programs, BUT if they
are all Windows programs, the chances are that they use "The Windows
Printer" meaning that each program does *not* do its own handshaking with
the printer, but instead use a system-wide driver. Once that driver is set
up, it *should* (according to Windows specs) print with any program that
uses the Windows driver. That was, and is, an advantage of the Windows
environment. (Of course, I think it should have been done with DOS a long
time ago, but let's leave that one alone! <g>)
But -- Problem is, you're using a DOS program, and generally, most or
all DOS programs had to be set up *individually* with to make sure they
worked with any given printer. That you are running the DOS program under
Windows does not change that fact at all. The DOS program is essentially
running in a DOS session that you "look at" via Windows.
Anyway, it is almost predictable that other, native Windows software
would work differently than DOS ScriptThing, as far as printing goes.
For some reason (laziness, I guess) I also still have DOS ScriptThing
installed on the Pentium under Windows. So just now I printed 3 pages from
the middle of a sample script, with no problem at all. I don't have an HP
LJ II, but I had to use an HP LJ II driver, since that's the closest one on
the list to my printer. Worked fine.
You'll note that there are options under the Print Menu, including page
setup and choice of printer. I do not recall where the printer options come
from -- most likely the installation disk. If your printer isn't there, you
can try choosing the "wrong" printer from that list, if necessary, and see
if it prints correctly. Just go down the list if you want. (Better yet,
check the manuals!) One of them oughta work, and if so, just use that one.
I am guessing that some of this is what Tech Support would have told you,
for what it's worth. And if you're still stuck, then you should call them!
As people can attest, I don't normally believe in using public messages for
software troubleshooting. (I don't normally believe in doing free work for
the vendors, for that matter! <g>) But since this case just got a little out
of hand, I thought I'd try to offer fixes here, with the caveat that I'm not
in any official capacity, and this advice could be wrong. Anyway, good luck!
--
Rich Wilson
http://www.communicator.com
Martin Kunert
Screenplay Systems wrote in message <34A144...@Screenplay.com>...
>BetterDuck <CMay...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>> You know why? Cause if Dreamworks would have had the
>> problem I have had, it would have been fixed that friggen day. The fact
>> that Mr. Speilberg isn't Mr. Duck is why guys like moi get dicked
>> around, and big wig studio moguls get their balls coddled.
>
>Hey -- I take every problem that ANY client has as "serious". And so
>does my staff. Wasn't always that way, but over the years, we've
>learned that the customer is #1.
Good, cause three years ago when I bought your software, I was treated like
shit by your tech support.
I bought the scheduling software for DOS. Nevermind that hundreds of
dollars was charged for software written to run under a 286 device drive
(despite the fact that 286'e were obsolete for years by then) and the 286
driver conflicted with normal 386 drivers (cause nobody writing the 386
drivers would think that people in their right mind still sell software with
286 drivers); but after two hours on tech support, I was given the answer..
We have no clue how to fix it.
Sorry, got to go.
Got other customers waiting.
Could I return the software?
Nope, the box was opened.
Will an update fix my problem and get the software running?
Sure.
Could I get an update?
Sure, if you pay for, and we don't know when then update will be
written.
We're talking about it but haven't written a line of code.
Got other customers waiting
Bye.
Click.
We accepted the experience with Screenplay Systems as a $300 (or so) loss
and tax write off.
RobtJonz
>I might have been a little too drunk last
>night when I went off on the tirade on ShitThing.
What???!!! Writers drink??!! I knew I had that bottle of Rebel Yell Bourbon
sitting in my fridge for a good reason!!
BTW, got ScriptThing and love it...so far.