Attention owners of, or subscribers to, FileMaker Pro 18, 19, 20, 21 or new 22: you are in a wonderful position to own a free copy of NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner.

Welcome to NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner

• Why Ours?
• Screenshots
• Questions and Responses
• Archived News
• Contact Form
• Download
• Acknowledgments

For visitors new to this website and new to NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner, please visit our Wix website, where there is a simpler presentation of material. Often the news items that are at the top of the current webpage may contain difficult - one may say, advanced - material, which may not be what newcomers may at first wish to engage with.

(Updated 7:20 pm, Monday, 9 March 2026 AEST).

Feature articles

Review of FileMaker 2025
Book review of Learn FileMaker Pro 2024 by Mark Conway Munro
The wonderful but difficult While function
Forensic deconstruction of a While function

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEWS ITEMS  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUPERFICIAL REVIEW OF LIBREOFFICE BASE (uploaded 9 March 2026)

(Please note: even though we have an installed copy of LibreOffice Base, we have not yet even experimented with it (our resistance is based on its supposed likeness to Microsoft Access, which we are somewhat averse to); instead, we are basing our review on YouTube tutorials. Once we use our copy of Base for a real-world solution, we will then present a proper review. So, what you have below is merely a look-in).

We believe database-creation software are the most complex that an office suite may offer, in the sense of “making” them in the first place. FileMaker Pro, for example, is more complex to build by programmers than, we believe, to build Microsoft Word(*). Thus, LibreOffice Base is, we believe, more complex to put together than LibreOffice Writer. So the fact that we are offered a free copy of LibreOffice Base is a wondrous gift. But more amazing is how the open-source community could build one of the most complex of software: a database-creation platform. A highly commendable effort!

To boot, LibreOffice Base is a relational database. That is reaching the stratosphere of database-creation software. What that means, simply put, is that two tables have synergy between them.

A database may comprise just one table or may comprise dozens of tables. For example, a one-table database may store recipes. That’s it. A single table can easily do this. A database may also have two (unrelated) tables: one for recipes and another for addresses. That’s okay.

But to have two tables related to each other is a different “ballgame” all together: for example, a table for products and a table of customers are joined in such a way that a “portal” (nomenclature from FMPro) can be created that shows next to each customer a list of products that the customer has bought, both views in the one record belonging to the customer … wow! A relational database is the height of power. NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner are inundated with related tables – they would be impossible without them. (One of only a few tables in NoteMaker that isn’t related is the visual calendar: it stands alone. With a few other notable exceptions, nearly every other table is related).

LibreOffice Base is relational, making it able to provide solutions for collecting and managing any data you can throw at it. How can such a powerful piece of software be offered for free, when, for example, a copy of FMPro costs hundreds of dollars? It just doesn’t add up. Granted, we believe FMPro’s internal programming language is more powerful than Base’s system of macros, and despite having Base on our solid-state drive, we would gladly pay hundreds of dollars for an upgrade to FMPro that meets certain items on our wish-list. It comes down to our love of, and expertise in, FMPro. We won’t give up on either that easily.

But watching several tutorials on YouTube, we have no doubt LibreOffice Base is worth a million dollars for being free. If you’ve never tried creating a database, try doing so in LibreOffice Base – once you do, you may become addicted to the database-creation magic like we have. Try in Base to create a very simple database, such as an address-book. Create three fields: “Name”, “Address” and “Phone”. Done. Enter a few of your friends’ details and you’re on your way … your first database. Simple – nothing wrong in being simple.

Then the moment comes when your skills extend to relating two tables. You already have an Address table, now create another table in the same database, say, Visit. In that table you have three fields: “Name”, “Date” and “Nature of Visit”. When you visit a friend, record the “date” in the “Date” field and in the “Nature of Visit” field write the reason for the visit. Now we wish to join the information from the Visit table to the Address table whereby the two tables share data. This is the tricky part and most important: they are joined by connecting the Name fields in the two tables, so that Base knows the name of the friend you are making visits to or receiving visits from(**). Thus:

ADDRESS TABLE comprising two records

Name	Address	Phone
Maria	2291D Make-Believe Road …	9xxx xxxx
Ricardo	3426A Make-Believe Road …	9xxx xxxx

VISIT TABLE (comprising three records)

Name	Date of Visit	Nature of Visit
Maria	3/09/2030	Visit to Maria for birthday
Maria	9/09/2030	Visited by Maria for luncheon
Ricardo	20/10/2030	At the stadium with Ricardo to watch soccer

So far, so good. You have two tables in the one database: Address and Visit. They are joined by the Name field, which both tables share. That’s the key that joins them. Now comes what Base calls a “sub-form” (or what FMPro calls a “portal”).

The record in the Address table that holds Maria’s details can be made to hold a sub-form …

MARIA’S RECORD IN THE ADDRESS TABLE with sub-form may look like this …

MARIA’S RECORD

Name	Address	Phone
Maria	2291D Make-Believe Road …	9xxx xxxx

SUB-FORM ATTACHED TO MARIA’S RECORD

Date of Visit	Nature of Visit
3/09/2030	Visit to Maria for birthday
9/09/2030	Visited by Maria for luncheon

(Please note. The insertion of a sub-form is possible only in “Form” view, not in pure “Table” view – that is to say, not in the spreadsheet-like interface shown above for educational purposes).

The sub-form only includes visits to or by Maria. Because the relationship is based on a shared name, Ricardo’s one visit is excluded here, but would appear on Ricardo’s record as a sub-form with one row (not counting the header row).

This in a nutshell is the magic of a database going relational. The magic happens because Maria’s name is in both tables, thus enabling LibreOffice Base to connect data from one table (VISIT) to another (ADDRESS)(***).

(*) Word has macros, but FMPro has a magnificent internal programming language almost similar in syntax to C++. Whereas the C++ programming language can create a FMPro, FMPro’s internal programming language cannot create a database: it only empowers FileMaker Pro from within and in relation to external objects connectable to FMPro.

(**) You actually have to join them by going to the diagrammatic representation of the two tables, click and hold on the “Name” field from the Address table and drag to the “Name” field on the Visit table. Done.

(***) Of course, there would be a foreseeable problem if there are two friends with the same name: Maria. This can be circumvented by the use of serial numbers (or, better still, by using unique identifiers – UIDs – as primary keys, as FMPro does automatically when creating a new table) but that is a complexity too soon to introduce here in our attempt to grasp the concept of related tables and to offer first-time users of LibreOffice Base the joy and power of creating their first pair of related tables.

 

ALTERNATIVES TO NOTEMAKER – TOO MANY! (uploaded 7 March 2026, revised 9 March 2026)

Wow, there are up to 100 (perhaps more) note-taking applications out there! We did a quick research on the internet and YouTube … we were overwhelmed by the kinds and levels being offered; so much so, we gave up doing a review of alternative note-taking applications to NoteMaker. We can only say this, in accordance to our relativised perspective concept, if you have found a note-taking application that meets all your needs, we suggest stay with it, don’t necessarily look for “better” on the word of others. We’ll go as far as to say this: if you currently have an application that best meets your note-taking needs, don’t give a moment’s thought to NoteMaker. Loyalty always has to count for something. Stay with what you’ve got, barring one’s natural instinct to perhaps satisfy curiosity. We haven’t seriously looked at a note-making application other than NoteMaker. If it doesn’t have a feature we want, we, as its developers, will make it happen. This privilege is not available to 99.999 per cent of the population. Therefore, in line with the concept of relativised perspective, we say: if your current program lacks a needed feature, then find a program that has the feature – making sure all else are equal.

LibreOffice Writer easily meets all our word-processing needs … we’re not looking for “better”, because in meeting our needs we automatically have the best, even if our needs are basic or what one may call typical word-processing tasks.

Here, there is a paradoxical way we’re toying with the use of the words “better” and best. Best is what works for you; better is what others think you should have. For example, it is proclaimed near and far that “Microsoft Word is the industry standard”. We kind-of say: “Yeah, but so what?” For an individual, does that mean Word is a must-have? In respect to ourselves, does that mean we should ditch LibreOffice Writer and return to Word? Nothing is “better” than what best works for you, at any one time, at any one level – nothing(*).

Like our previous ownership of a copy of Microsoft Word, LibreOffice Writer has for about a year (possibly two) been rarely used. We were so much into FileMaker Pro, Final Draft, Scrivener and Microsoft’s Expression Web 4 that Writer counted for little(**). About three weeks ago, all that changed when we decided to write the first draft of an Expression Web post in Writer, then paste it into Expression Web(***). That now has become, for us, the standard workflow between Writer and Expression Web.

CONCLUSION. We were surprised to find there are an overwhelming number of note-taking applications. With only a cursory look at some of them, we nonetheless wish to extrapolate to all of them in saying they are – each in their own way – equally wonderful as NoteMaker or, put another way, NoteMaker is no better than a single other one. The decision rests with users to decide which best meets their very individual needs(****) in taking notes or recording information. We’ll only reaffirm that for making short notes or capturing pieces of digital information of any kind, choose one of a 100 note-taking applications out there. For writing articles, essays and lengthier posts, look for a word processor (eg, LibreOffice Writer or Microsoft Word). For long-form writing (books and novels), go for Scrivener or a similar application. We only wish to make one’s writing-life easier: of course, a word processor can do note-taking and write lengthy works of non-fiction and novels, but if you parcel-out writing tasks to specialised applications, set-ups become simpler and overall efficiency may increase.

(*) For a long period we were nostalgic for Microsoft Word, but we’re going to proclaim for the first time, today, 7 March 2026, that we do not miss Word at all, not the littlest bit. (Please do not misunderstand us: Word is a fantastic program that met our every word-processing need but due to changed circumstances we lost the privilege of downloading a free copy of Word to our new laptop. Word was best for us at the time, but changed circumstances forced us to look for “better”).

(**) Mostly to have pasted into it a piece from Expression Web for spell checking – Expression Web does not have a facility for spell checking.

(***) Surely, many will say, that’s a natural thing to do! We did try sometime ago, but for some reason we thought there were some issues with transplanting a piece written in Writer into Expression Web. Well, so we thought, but we now realise there are no issues: for some reason, we had got it wrong.

(****) And that includes aesthetics: a software’s appeal isn’t only functionality (what it’s capable of doing for you) but also the look of it (how it makes you feel); and, of course, the cost factor – if not free – is a consideration for many.

 

NOTEMAKER VS LIBREOFFICE WRITER (uploaded 6 March 2026, revised 7 March 2026)

The NoteMaker Team says “no way does NoteMaker compete with LibreOffice Writer”. NoteMaker is for making notes; Writer is for creating documents. We will not use Writer for what we use NoteMaker; nor would we use NoteMaker for what Writer does so much better.

Even though students may write a practice-essay several pages long in NoteMaker, a far better – that is, more professional-looking – job can be done with Writer.

For the general public, NoteMaker is normally for short bits of information, on average probably a paragraph or two or three long – and that would be about it.

For us, NoteMaker does not compete with Writer as Writer does not compete with Scrivener. These are distinct-purposed writing programs. Of course, Writer can compile pages of notes, each note having a subheading, but these are not as easily searchable as they would be in NoteMaker, a database. Snippets of any information are best served in a database, which allows for easier and greater manipulation … after all, each note is a record and databases “love” toying around with records.

No matter how wonderful LibreOffice Writer is and how competitive it is in relation to other word processors, when it comes to making (short) notes it and they can’t compete with NoteMaker in terms of efficiency, search capabilities, grouping and outright raw power in writing and managing 100s and 1,000s of notes in the one file. It is with pride that we have truthfully written the aforementioned sentence. We love NoteMaker, our creation, as much as we love LibreOffice Writer, the creation of wonderful developers and coders from around the world but each has their distinct place in the world of writing (adjective, not verb) software(*).

(*) And both, NoteMaker and LibreOffice Writer are free. Well, NoteMaker is free in the sense we don’t make a penny from it, but it isn’t free in the sense that the expansive FileMaker Pro (FMPro) database-creation platform is required to run it. We don’t know what we can do about it. We’ve suggested that Claris, owners of FMPro, bring out a free client version that – like what Adobe Acrobat Reader is to PDFs – only enables FMPro application but cannot create them. We had a look at LibreOffice Base, it appears too much like Microsoft Access to appeal to us: we just love FMPro too much to “betray” it for another – anyway, our database-creation expertise is all in with FMPro. NoteMaker is such a huge application, to rewrite it from the ground up in Base or Access, may take many months, possibly a year or two. We wish to offer NoteMaker to everyone in the world who wants it, free of charge, but unless one has a copy of FMPro installed on their laptops or desktops, NoteMaker cannot be opened. However, the good news is that we believe there are free note-taking applications out there and possibly some may be open-source (like LibreOffice is open-source). We’ll do a little research and report back to you. Stay tuned to this website for a minor review of alternatives to NoteMaker.

 

RELATIVISED PERSPECTIVE AND TOP TEN LISTS (uploaded 6 March 2026)

In our previous post, we argued that, for us, that is to say from our point of view, Microsoft Word is not better than LibreOffice Writer. Should we desire a feature Word has but Writer doesn’t, than we can say Word is better suited to our needs than Writer. Should Writer have a feature we need but Word doesn’t have it then we may say Writer is more suitable for us. We call this kind of comparison “relativised perspective”.

Take a top-ten list of word processors. Microsoft’s minimal-feature Notepad may be at the bottom of the list but if people find Notepad meets their every writing need then for those people, Notepad is number one; the nine ranked above are perhaps for them merely clutter-filled programs with features they don’t have any uses for.

Top-ten lists often come down to personal choices. But even then relativised perspective comes into play. For example, a comment about, say, the hypothetically placed 5^th ranked Google Docs may read “Docs is great for those groups who place a high-level dependency on collaboration”. In other words, the comment tangentially is saying that Docs could be the number-one choice for those groups who are into sharing documents for viewing, commenting and editing over the internet. Why would that group opt for any of the four programs ranked above Docs? Why would any one member of the group say another word processor is “better” for their needs?

Say someone’s top-ten list of word processors places LibreOffice Writer 4^th, that Word, Pages and WordPerfect rank higher, is totally meaningless to us because Writer meets every one of our current and projected word-processing needs. For us, therefore, Writer ranks number one in, what is for us, a futile but curious top-ten list. That is the conundrum that makes top-ten lists no more than curiosities. However, if the list is merely a non-ranked compilation of 10 suggested word processors with comments as to which word processor may meet this or that set of needs for this or that particular individual or group … such a list then becomes guidance, useful for those who haven’t yet decided on which word processor to try first.

Relativised perspective “says” there is no “better” but only what best suits a particular individual or group. We have erred in past posts saying that “Word has the edge over Writer” or something similar – no, it doesn’t: Word has nothing over Writer – for us. Drafting this piece in LibreOffice Writer (before posting to our website) has been a thoroughly rewarding experience. It may have reached the point where writing pieces in Writer could be an excuse to merely be in its wonderful environment; that with each visitation brings the possibility of discovering that little bit more of LibreOffice Writer’s feature-set that just may add to the usefulness of the program for us.

When a world-famous novelist, George RR Martin, still uses WordStar, a 1980s word processor that runs on a DOS machine (no graphic user interface here; instead, command lines), who among us is foolish enough to tell George there are better, more modern word processors? He has a dislike for spell checkers and internet distractions when writing novels(*). This anecdote highlights better than anything else in this piece how relativised perspective looks like in action. For the purpose he has in mind, there is no word processor better than WordStar.

CONCLUSION. Top-ten lists are fun to look at and can be informative. But the concept of relativised perspective somewhat undermines their credibility when ranking is applied.

(*) For emails, tax returns and internet researches, George uses another computer.

 

LIBREOFFICE IS NOW 26.2 (uploaded 5 March 2026, revised twice 7 March 2026)

The magnificent Writer, as part of the LibreOffice package, has, with the package, been updated to version 26.2.1.2 (correct as at 5 March 2026). Straightaway, we’ve noticed Writer has become snappier and it opens faster than before, sometimes blistering fast. The Team loves LibreOffice Writer: so far it has met our every word-processing need – those needs admittedly being quite basic. Great as Microsoft Word is(*) – with every use of Writer – it’s becoming more and more a distant memory: we’ve almost reached zero point in terms of missing it.

(BY THE BYE. If you have trouble installing a LibreOffice update, if the process doesn’t seem to reach completion – this has happened once to us in a previous attempt to update LibreOffice (though updating to 26.2 presented no problem) then you may do what we did: uninstall LibreOffice and then install the updated version).

(*) We are tempted to say Word has the edge over Writer. But there is a trap in saying that (a trap we’ve fallen into several times). Word may have a feature that Writer doesn’t. But, from our perspective, if that feature is never going to be used by us, it does not become a criterion to judge Writer the less for not having that feature. For our uses, Writer is as good as Word and in some minor instances better as in other minor instances Word is better. These balance out. For example, there is a deceptively slow-motion rendering style when typing in Word, which we ever only got half-used to. Its keystroke-rendering speed isn’t actually slow, it is as fast as Writer’s. It’s just that typing in Writer feels more “grounded” (staccato), whereas typing in Word feels as if “gliding over water” (legato). On that score, in terms of typing style, we prefer Writer. On the other hand, Word has a more appealing contextual menu. Therefore, overall, Writer and Word are as good as each other. For our part, we will make an effort not to fall again into the trap of saying Word has the edge over Writer. However, if collaboration is your thing, Google Docs has the edge over Writer. But we don’t share documents over the internet for viewing, commenting or editing by others; therefore, we won’t say Docs has the edge over Writer. On the other hand, we could sometimes say Writer has the edge over Docs in terms of powerful formatting features but users of Docs may not care for that power and therefore should not regard Writer as overall “better”. This back-and-forth can keep going on and on; suffice to say, if the current word processor you are using meets all your needs, it’s the best one, no other word processor is better unless one speaks in the hypothetical sense.

 

SCRIVENER, FINAL DRAFT, WORD PROCESSORS AND GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (uploaded 3 March 2026, revised 5 March 2026)

Scrivener and Final Draft are specialised word processors. Word, WordPerfect and LibreOffice Writer are examples of generalised word processors. Scrivener is the environment par excellence for long-form writing (such as novels and non-fiction books)(*), whereas Final Draft is a dedicated screenwriting program. Sure, generalised word processors can do both novels and screenplays, but never, we believe, as easy or as comfortable as the dedicated ones.

For short pieces we will give first preference to LibreOffice Writer. But for long-form writing, always Scrivener. One member of the Team wrote a novel of over 600 pages in Scrivener. At the time, years ago, Word was tried first, but it was not the most pleasant environment to write a novel – strange to say, it felt “cold”. Then came Scrivener … what a cosy environment to write a novel in! The novel would not take off in Word: after a page or two, the project was abandoned along with the ambition of writing a proper first novel. Then came along Scrivener … the novel flourished. Scrivener is so beloved by us that not for a moment would consideration be given to writing a novel in LibreOffice Writer, Word or any other generalised word processor.

Why try to configure a generalised word processor to write a screenplay when there are nearly a dozen wonderful free screenwriting software out there (eg, WriterSolo[**])? We use Final Draft. It originally cost us about $250. This gives the impression it’s expensive. However, upgrades come out at about every three years, so the initial cost of about $250 is spread over three years, the resulting cost is about $83 a year. But it gets better. The upgrade price is normally $99, which is $33 a year till the next upgrade, on average every three years. Most screenwriting software are probably cheaper and many are free, but Final Draft is arguably the best of the lot – mind you, by only a whisker – and not because it’s the proclaimed industry standard. Many other screenwriting software can export to the Final Draft file format, which is the format producers desire to have and share around.

No, not because of that, but because Final Draft is conducive to the free-flow writing of a screenplay in ways hard to explain. There’s intelligence everywhere, even the way the cursor behaves. But it lacks half-a-dozen things we would like to see, some of which other screenwriting software have. But it lacks one thing we are grateful for: generative artificial intelligence (genAI) – correct as at 5 March 2026 for Final Draft’s current version, 13. Imagine genAI writing dialogue and action paragraphs for you? Is that you being creative?(***) Your every word should be your word, coming out of your mind and from the heart, no matter how poorly words may be used or selected or sentences constructed … eventually you’ll learn, like we have, to differentiate synonyms, learn grammar and structuring sentences with the rules provided by syntax – all part of the developing relationship we have with the language we write in.

The context we wish to set is one of caution: “do be careful for what you wish for”. If screenwriters wish to work with genAI, go for it. But there will come a day when a whole screenplay will be written by genAI (within certain guiding parameters set by producers), which may very well be the start of making screenwriters obsolete. Or screenwriters may do the same and present to producers their own simulated screenplays … becoming a rather sad battle between the writer and the producer as to who presents to whom the better genAI-screenplay. Could we say, with plausibility, should that scenario become reality that creative screenwriting – directly by humans – is faced with an existential threat? The future often is the choices we make today.

(*) Please note: it’s not to say that Scrivener is the best of the long-form writing software. Other such software have not being sufficiently engaged with by us to present an accurate ranking.

[**] WriterSolo boggles the mind at how good it is – and it’s free and downloadable (avoid the cloud version, which is the first UI you may encounter – instead go to the Help menu). Please do not confuse it with its sibling, WriterDuet, which is offered for free trialling … but in order to continue using it after the trial period is over, payment is required. WriterSolo, to our knowledge, is free forever, but, unlike its sibling, WriterDuet, WriterSolo lacks the facility for online collaboration.

(***) The question assumes you first ask genAI as to what to write next for, say, the action paragraph. However, the question becomes more difficult when phrased as “should genAI offer suggestions for an action paragraph already written by you?” In other words, you first write the action paragraph, then check genAI’s one, two or more suggestions for a rewrite. Now, it becomes trickier. If you are confident of your language skills and your ability to express your thoughts with accurate words and sentence structure, you may skip checking genAI’s suggestions. If you’re not, the temptation to check may be strong. The “cost-benefit analysis” of the relationship between screenwriters and genAI is for each individual screenwriter to work out. The question could come down to “by how much does genAI diminishes your creativity or, on the contrary, to what extent it aids the creative process?” Only each individual screenwriter can ultimately answer the question. However, to return to the original assertion, should the day come when advanced training models enable genAI to actually follow what you are writing and then to offer what next to write in terms of dialogue and action paragraphs, maybe that’s the time we could begin to worry about the future for screenwriters as creative writers. Hopefully, the next iteration of Final Draft – version 14 – will not embody genAI to that extent.

 

OUR LOVE FOR LIBREOFFICE WRITER GROWS (uploaded 2 March 2026, revised 4 March 2026)

Now that we are using LibreOffice Writer regularly, our appreciation for it increases. For many upon many people their major contact with software is by way of a word processor. When people buy into Microsoft’s Office suite, it’s most likely for Word, a word processor. But for some people, like us, a word processor, at first, had only incidental use – for us, other software (FileMaker Pro, Expression Web 4, Scrivener and Final Draft) were by far more used. But recently we changed the way we work. An entry intended for Expression Web 4 (our website-builder, the one you are currently visiting) is now first drafted in LibreOffice Writer. That is to say, Writer has reached the status of being much used. This is the thing: the more we use Writer, the more we discover the wonderful little things that are making us ever more fond of the free word processor. “Free”? Unbelievable that such a powerful piece of software is free. But, it is.

One half of the Team used to use Word – quite irregularly, mind you. But in migrating to a new laptop and due to the loss of the privileged password, he could not install Word on the new laptop as a freebie. Rather than be on a paid subscription plan(*) – and considering how rare was his use of Word – he decided to look for a free open-source word processor to just get by with. Mind you, he was sceptical about open-source software. He took a chance on LibreOffice, used its word-processing component, Writer, only now and then, and believing in the principle of “effort being rewarded” he donated money to The Document Foundation (the supervisory body of LibreOffice). Still, he used Writer as irregularly as he previously used Word. There were periods wherein he thought he should have Word installed as well (perhaps to compare and contrast the two). He was planning to negotiate with Microsoft about his previous entitlement to a free copy of Word, but so infrequently had been his use of Word … and thereafter, Writer … he procrastinated and simply stayed with Writer.

Then, only 10 days ago (from today, 3 March 2026), everything changed. Now, Writer is used regularly. And in using it regularly it has become a journey of discovery … eventually, “a love affair”. No way is he yearning to the same extent as previously for the all-mighty Word – Writer will do just fine. And it’s the first time he realised just how giving open-source programmers from around the world are. In our opinion, Writer is competitive with any corporate-produced word processor, be it Word, Pages, Docs, WordPerfect and others(**), depending, of course, what you may wish to majorly use the word-processing program for and in what environment.

DECLARATION. We use LibreOffice Writer in quite a limited way (though regularly): primarily for creating documents for pasting into our website-builder, Expression Web 4 (this piece you are reading now was first written in Writer). Our documents are not used as focal points for collaborative work over the internet (other word processors, such as Google Docs, may be better for this manner of work). We love LibreOffice Writer for not being cloud-based (like Docs and the free version of Word 365 are) and that instead it is downloadable to the safety(***) and privacy of our solid state drive (SSD). In general, we are hesitant to adopt cloud-based software(****). We are therefore thankful to the gods that FileMaker Pro, Final Draft, Expression Web 4, Scrivener and LibreOffice Writer – our most used and loved software – are downloadable to our SSD.

(*) One half of the Team is averse to subscription-based software, so much so, he is thankful that he has never so far been forced to engage with such software.

(**) We are not saying that LibreOffice Writer is better than the other free full-featured open-source word processors such as WPS Writer, OpenOffice Writer and SoftMaker TextMaker. We can’t assert such, simply because we haven’t tried these others – the fact we have not tried others shows how happy we are with LibreOffice Writer.

(***) Safe as long as your work is regularly saved to a USB (thumb-sized) flash-drive or to other forms of external storage just in case your hardware conks out, your computer is stolen or lost or the software freezes.

(****) What follows may have an element of irrationality: one half of the Team has a little fear of radiation. When he trialled the free version of Word 365, every time the document was saved, it was sent to the cloud, which involved the release of low-level radiation (energy) in order for this to happen. If there is a choice, he prefers an installed version of the software, with practically no radiation. However, he is aware that he watches a couple hours of YouTube videos each day that involve low-level radiation to-and-from his laptop. Still, to have a few hours of near-zero radiation by using installed software instead of cloud-based ones may be worth something.

 

TOWARDS 2,000 NOTES IN “MY NOTEBOOK”

A milestone is coming. NoteMaker’s real-world version, “My Notebook”, is 10 notes away from reaching the magical 2,000 mark. Stay tuned to this website when the target is reached and celebrations follow. A comprehensive report will be presented on the marvel of making 2,000 real-world notes using the incredible NoteMaker platform – your platform!

 

“FALLING IN LOVE” WITH LIBREOFFICE WRITER (revised 2 March 2026)

The more the Team uses LibreOffice Writer, the more it is impressed by its setup. How could a community of volunteers spread across the world put together a software that practically emulates Microsoft’s mighty Word? Admittedly, we use LibreOffice Writer in quite a basic manner; but as we do so, we notice the toolbars (ribbons). Right now, we are viewing the Home ribbon …(*) nearly everything that is basic and necessary to assist in writing is there: font colour, indentation, table creator, text alignment, font choice & size, make bold, make italic, ordered & unordered lists, special-character picker and highlight colour … not to name every feature available on this ribbon(**).

Packing in so many features never appears as clutter because clusters of features are neatly sectioned off. The putting-together of LibreOffice Writer is a magnificent effort by the wonderful volunteers and The Document Foundation, which acts as the supervisory body, with the final say on what goes into Writer(***). The amazing thing is that Writer is free, no conditions attached. (However, like with Wikipedia, donations help keep the magnificent effort going. Any amount, no matter how little, is a good amount as it adds up to the modest donations made by others. We’ve already made modest donations to Wikipedia and to The Document Foundation and are considering further donations to both supervisory bodies).

Word may have the edge over Writer, but, as is common when one falls in love with another, we’re coming to also love Writer’s few shortcomings, knowing that the community of volunteers are always focused on meeting challenges(****). Corporations around the world largely go for Word, but some smaller businesses and organisations have opted for Writer and other free full-featured word processors that are compatible with Word. For our needs, we are quite happy with Writer(#). To give perspective, generalised word processors (such as Writer and Word) don’t figure large in our ecosystem, whereas FileMaker (a database-creation platform) and Final Draft (a specialised word processor for writing screenplays) do. We think the world of Writer, even though it isn’t a large part of our world(##). Update: 2 March 2026. The previous sentence isn’t quite as true today: LibreOffice Writer is rapidly becoming a larger and larger part of our world with each day passing.

(*) The ellipsis character as used originally in Writer is not default and has to be enabled. To do so, do this …
1. Click on the button on the far right of the menu bar (the one with three horizontal lines).
2. Select "Option".
3. On the list (far left), select “Language and Locales”.
4. Click “English Sentence Checking”.
5. Go to the “Punctuation” section.
6. And tick “Ellipsis”.

(**) One feature that isn’t easy to find on the Home ribbon is paragraph spacing.
1. Right-click on any text in your document (or click the Home button on the far right of the ribbon).
2. Choose “Paragraph”.
3. Again, choose “Paragraph…”.
4. (if necessary, click on the Indents & Spacing tab).
5. And finally go to “Spacing” and for “Paragraph Below” set from 0.00 to 0.25 cm or more.
OR
Simply click the Layout ribbon and go directly to “Below Paragraph Spacing” (place cursor over the four fields with “0.00 cm” to find “Below Paragraph Spacing”) and enter 0.25 cm or what spacing is desirable for you.

(***) Please note: Writer can not be downloaded on its own, it comes in an office package with a spreadsheet, a database and other programs. We as yet have not used any program in the package other than Writer. We are unlikely to ever use its database: for us, FileMaker Pro is too fantastic a database-creation platform to consider any other, including MS Access or the easy-to-use internet-based offerings.

(****) That Writer doesn’t appear to have full-blown genAI oversight is not a negative for us as we’re advocates of giving one’s own writing skills a free rein and our wish to minimise usurpation by genAI – though, paradoxically, we love genAI.

(#) Our choice of Writer is purely fortuitous and does not indicate that it is the best full-featured downloadable free word processor available.

(##) Because we didn’t use Writer much, our appreciation of it was minimal. But since recently using it for every first draft of our pieces for pasting into Expression Web 4, we are fascinated with its features. LibreOffice Writer is truly an incredible piece of software. We’ve only touched on a fraction of what it can offer – the basic stuff mostly – but it bristles with power (enablement). Just a minor example: we use three colours for our writing in Writer (for pasting into Expression Web 4), black, blue and red … these colours are intelligently listed separately on the colour palette making it, oh, so easy to reuse them – a little feature, but very, very useful in everyday writing terms. Another little thing: highlight a word and press the double quotation key (with the Shift key) and the end quotation mark is automatically also inserted (same applies for parentheses). A little thing, but no less a wow. What’s also wonderfully useful in the everyday sense is the predictive word: we write “fan” and “fantastic” pops up as a choice … press enter, “fantastic” it is. (However, the word “fantastic”, in full, needs to have been typed previously before “fan” will then elicit “fantastic” as a choice). It’s funny how the little things add up to make for wonderful writing experiences. Writer opens almost as quick as Word does – Word having the advantage of being in the same stable as the Windows 11 operating system (Expression Web 4 also belongs to the same stable and it opens lightning fast). If you have Word, you won’t probably need Writer; but, if you have Writer, you almost won’t miss Word. For Mac users, Apple’s fantastic word processor, Pages, is free with the operating system: it’s up to each individual Mac user to decide whether or not to give LibreOffice Writer a go.

 

YOUTUBE AND GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (revised 2 March 2026)

YouTube is a fantastic streaming service. It has videos on nearly every thing that may concern or interest humans. Documentaries on about every aspect of life. How-to videos on anything one may wish to make, fix or cook. You won’t likely find silent movies of the 1920s on Foxtel, but you may on YouTube – to boot, there are plenty of films from the 1930s, 1940s … right up to the 2020s.

YouTube is successfully competing with free-to-air TV for the attention of viewers. For one member of the team, the ratio of watching TV and YouTube is about 50:50. And like TV, YouTube is free with ads.

But generative artificial intelligence (genAI) may be causing a problem for YouTube more than for free-to-air TV, especially in the realm of animal documentaries. Over the past year, more and more documentaries pertaining to depict battles between prey and predators are fictitious – that is, AI-created. At first it was easy to tell, but as genAI is fed more training images, it is becoming harder to tell the fake from the real.

A lot of AI-created videos are fun as when you may see two world leaders at war with each other in the real world dance gloriously together in tune to a hit song. But documentaries on the life of animals may be seen as educative, thus fake AI-created videos may cause confusion in this respect.

We may have a simple solution: possibly label genAI videos with “AI GENERATED” or “AI RECONSTRUCTION”.

 

REVIEW (*) OF SCOOB! (2020), THE FILM (uploaded 23 February 2026, revised 2 March 2026)

Six years ago, Scooby-Doo animation hit the cinemas big-time with Scoob! (2020) – though, at first, somewhat thwarted by COVID restrictions on theatre attendance. The film had great promise. The first 12 minutes make for an incredible animation experience: the detail is extraordinary and the storyline heart warming – it being about how lonely Shaggy met a pup called Scooby-Doo … then, how the pair met Daphne, Velma and Fred and had their first mystery-solving adventure together as children. Look at the background: you see hundreds of people walking along Venice Beach, California, as distinct individuals – that’s incredible animation. You see individual leaves on trees responding to mild wind. We guess that’s what 3D computer animation has over 2D hand-drawn cell animation. Yes, but it comes at a price … please read on.

Fast forward to when the gang-members reach their late-teens. Quite a shock to see unfamiliar characters calling themselves Fred, Velma and Daphne. “That can’t be Fred, he doesn’t look anywhere near the Fred we’ve come to recognise – wow, may not even be as likeable”. “That’s Daphne? No way! That’s a stranger with the same name”. “Is that Velma? Looks a little like her, but it’s an imposter, surely”. Only Shaggy and Scooby-Doo are close to the original. What were the producers thinking? What made them think they would get away with the substitutions from diehard fans?

It gets worse. The voice talents we’ve come to associate with our beloved characters are largely replaced by Hollywood stars such as Zac Efron (Fred), Gina Rodrigues (Velma) and Amanda Seyfried (Daphne). The strategy by producers to get cinema-seats filled was to promote the film as having star-power. It was a gamble: it paid off in some ways and failed in other ways.

Action and dialogue come at us like a rapid-fire machine gun. We suspect both are a means to cover up or use as padding for an otherwise difficult-to-sustain storyline. There have to be quiet moments, allowing for savouring of character development, poignant dialogue, heart-felt emotions, some sophisticated action and for appreciation of scenery. There is nothing wrong for a storyline to linger so audiences can take in and savour quality moments.

Then come the others. Why have Dick Dastardly in the picture? Why not have an unknown – as is the tradition – as the bad guy who is revealed when unmasked? Why the superhero Blue Falcon? Why not let the teenagers be their own heroes?

What happened to a franchise that has been successfully formulaic for decades? A formula we, diehard fans, expect but never tire of – that’s exactly what makes us diehard fans. Couldn’t the storyline be a simple down-to-earth one? How about the five teens ending up in Venice, Italy, say, on a holiday, where they encounter the mystery of gondolas going missing? In the background would be wonderful Venice with Shaggy and Scooby-Doo showing their love of pizzas and spaghetti bolognese.

A lot of money went into the making of Scoob! (2020), a reported $90 million, and the beginning is nothing less than fantastic. Producers say, that despite COVID restrictions, the film was a success, but the planned sequel, which, so far, as at 2 March 2026, has not come to fruition. Should the film have been a monetary success, great, but on several other fronts it has, to us, been a failure. Re-watching the first 12 minutes is a delight, but, after that, re-watching becomes more and more difficult. There are not many endearing moments to savour or take away as memorable filmic experiences.

CONCLUSION. Scoob! (2020) is largely potential-missed. The first 12 minutes look promising: the animation is remarkable in its detail. Action is at a steady pace and time is given to the study of character. But after that, after the first 12 minutes, when the moment comes the children are teenagers, the film goes awry. The voice-cast are unfamiliar. The lead characters (save for Shaggy and Scooby-Doo) are visually unrecognisable. Having all sorts of other characters only dilutes the plot. Action reaches dizzying speed. Dialogue becomes gratuitous and too often lacks import to plot and character development. Many diehard fans only wish to see the wonderful teen-gang engage with masked fiends – who are ordinary humans with criminal intent. We love the formula, don’t change it to please “new” fans or “old” critics. The paradox is this: the new fans may love the same formula we do, but Scoob! (2020) didn’t give them the chance of finding out. Some of the film is quite outrageous, in parts nonsense and in other parts nonsensical – at least to us. Every one of the 37 direct-to-video movies in the franchise (excepting the puppet version, which we have not yet seen) is more enjoyable than Scoob! (2020). Finally, to producers we wish to say this: stay with the formula that has worked for nearly 60 years. Don’t listen to those who knock the franchise as having the “same tired old formula” – they may not be the “fans” you should concern yourselves with because the “same tired old formula” is the magic that many long-standing fans are enchanted with. Scoob! (2020) is disappointing for us. All we were looking forward to was the cherished franchise-formula writ large. Instead, we got a mangled – and at times, a jarring, over-the-top – version. Please, producers, stay with the formula. If you wish to change the formula, please consider starting a new franchise.

PERSPECTIVE. It’s too easy to criticise the efforts of others. The producers went big: a $90-million dollar effort to put on the cinema-screen a 3D-animated film from the Scooby-Doo franchise … and for that, they should be congratulated. They wanted success for their film and went all-out to ensure it was achieved. They hired big-name Hollywood talent, they went for action galore in the storyline – and desired the visuals to be nothing less than sensational. In short, their effort was an attempt at extravaganza (possibly thinking extravaganza would overwhelm doubters). Perhaps, one or two of the producers may see the result as we have: extravaganza morphing into too many moments of silliness and over-the-top action. Perhaps children love those “silly” – seen by them as “fun” – moments and are exhilarated with the action and perhaps it’s a case of us adults selfishly wanting Scoob! (2020) to be more mature in its characterisation, dialogue and action. To repeat: it is too easy to be critical of the efforts of others – around the world, criticism of this or that comes too easy. Scoob! (2020) is what it is: take it or leave it. Before deciding, however, we say give it a viewing (if you haven’t already) and judge for yourselves. We are ever-thankful to producers past and present who have given us 37 enjoyable direct-to-video Scooby-Doo films. The awesome teens (it is assumed Scooby-Doo is a teenager in dog-years[**]) have become our “friends” – all we wish for is to meet them again and again in new – non-extravagant – formulaic adventures.

AN AFTER-NOTE. Again we first wrote the above review in LibreOffice Writer and then copied and pasted into Expression Web 4 (our web-builder). Before, it used to be the other way round: merely using Writer to check spelling, since Expression Web 4 does not include a spell checker. Silly us for taking so long to write in Writer first: we tried before but we mistakenly were put off by minor transcription issues. Now, we intend to always begin writing in LibreOffice Writer and then transfer to Expression Web 4.

(*) Despite the use of “we”, the review is written by one adult fan, one half of the NoteMaker Team.

[**] Scoob! (2020) has made it difficult to assert that Scooby-Doo is a teenager in dog-years. One dog-year is presumed to equal seven human years. Shaggy met Scooby-Doo when Shaggy was a child, a tween at most. By the time Shaggy reaches late-teens, up to eight years have passed, making Scooby-Doo something like (8×7) 56 years old in human terms. We believe Scooby-Doo needs to be two-and-half years old (= 17-18 years old in human terms) to be referred to as a “teenager”. Nonetheless, we’ll ignore this conundrum introduced by the timeline from Scoob! (2020) and assume Scooby-Doo is forever two-and-half years old when grown up, thus a teenager in human terms, just like Shaggy, Daphne, Velma and Fred are forever teenagers.

 

HOW GOOD IS LIBREOFFICE WRITER?

It is excellent. And it is free. The Team uses it to check spelling before posting pieces or articles written in Expression Web 4 to its website. Though it's free, we have donated $Aust50 to The Document Foundation that brings together Writer (we believe effort should be rewarded). Microsoft offers Word 365 free but only for the downsized cloud-only version. LibreOffice Writer is downloadable to the local drive (ie, to your laptop or desktop) and is full-featured. It pretty much does everything Word does, perhaps short on embodying genAI (as Word and Docs have). But it has huge amounts of non-generative artificial intelligence. It does the basics really well, such as capitalising first words of sentences. We have experienced nothing better than the wonderful way Writer makes highlighting letters, words, sentences and paragraphs so easy and so accurate (it actually frames the passage). It has a nifty feature which attempts to guess the next word after one writes the first two or three letters. Writer is as huge a word processor as Word is, perhaps a little short when it comes to basic grammar checking (as we have seen in a previous post, Writer failed to red-flag the expression, “it’s development …”). But what a magnificent effort by a community of volunteers! That is not to say that Word isn’t a superlative word processor. It’s fantastic! It comes down to a battle between the corporate structure versus the community of volunteers. The tight corporate structure tends to slightly win over the loose community of volunteers. But what can’t be beaten is that Writer is free and downloadable to your computer. In a loving way, one may forgive its every shortcoming. We love LibreOffice Writer and it meets nearly all our needs.

(It took us a long time to realise we should write the other way round. Today, 21 February 2026, is the first day we first wrote our piece or article in LibreOffice Writer, then copied-and-pasted into Expression Web 4, which itself has no oversight of one's writing, not even a spell checker. We hesitated, thinking there would be issues going from Writer to Expression Web. We no longer care even if there are some minor issues, the new way is the better way).

PLEASE NOTE that we have not tried other free downloadable word processors ... but we have reason to believe they're wonderful as well. Therefore, at no time do we wish to say that LibreOffice Writer is the best of this group.

 

A "BRUTAL" REALITY-CHECK ABOUT GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

The wonder that is generative artificial intelligence (genAI) is justified at a certain level, but bear in mind that genAI does not have understanding, does not comprehend beauty, does not dream – it is totally devoid of feeling. Contrary to science fiction, genAI will never have a heart. Everything about genAI is simulation. Everything about genAI is machine-reducible to the CPU, NPU (TPU) and the GPU. Meaning it will always be a machine-tool in the service (or disservice) of humans – and that is its strength, its wonder and perhaps its danger. To speak to a genAI "person" – no matter how real-like that "person" may come across – is a conversation with a machine. Not long ago, a desperate teenager engaged with a genAI-avatar about suicide … after the real-like conversation between human and machine, the teenager committed suicide. It could be crucial (perhaps life-saving) for every human-being to know that genAI will always be a machine capable of incredible – even miraculous – human simulation, but should never be mistaken for human. In the end, genAI lacks something that humans must have: taking responsibility for their actions.

DISCLAIMER. The view expressed above is by a Team whose only expertise is in building data processors using FileMaker Pro. Please challenge every sentence by assuming most sentences are the result of guesswork and those few sentences that purport to be factual (eg, teenager’s death) should be verified by way of research. Should your challenge of the above result in a truer, more accurate account, or result in part or total refutation, you have become the wiser for your efforts. You are the winner!

 

NOTICE OF ERROR in "The worderful but difficult While function" piece.

We've made a terrible error in our piece on "The wonderful but difficult While function". After setting up the While function for the specific instance of gathering a list of the first 10 callers to a radio-station competition, we brought up the additional conclusion that it is this kind of While function with which the developers of FileMaker may have used to create the wonderful built-in function LeftValues (text; numberOfValues). In the example we had While() give us a list of the first 10 callers, which we could have gotten using the LeftValues function. The mistake on our part is  that when specifying LeftValues() we wrote mistakenly Left ( Competition::Phone-In First Name ; 10 ) ... of course it should have been LeftValues ( Competition::Phone-In First Name ; 10 ). It's a terrible mistake on our part that may have confused many trying to understand what we were getting at. Many apologies for this. The embarrassment on our part is great. It now has been corrected. Please revisit the piece to better understand what we were attempting to get at by tying LeftValues() with the wonderful While function. We believe the greatest gift to have come out of version 18 of FileMaker Pro is the incredibly powerful (but sometimes troublesome) While function.

 

CODING IN FILEMAKER PRO

In a post of a few days ago, a 10-line code-module was presented that cleared the contents of the User Manual so that a revised version could then be entered. Compare this with the 1,000 lines of code(*) that make up the Scan button on the Note-Focus card. Click the Scan button and NoteMaker will "read" your note and may provide very basic and limited feedback. It will capitalise the first word in a sentence. It will place a full-stop at the end of a paragraph. It will alert you to an imbalance in quotation marks and also an imbalance between opening and closing parentheses. But the Scan button's 1,000 lines of code is augmented by user-defined transformations (via the AutoCorrectionCompletionExpansion facility). For example, a user may wish to have the Scan button expand "wsj" to "The Wall Street Journal". But again the old problem comes back. The last time the Team looked at the code for the Scan button was two or more years ago. To revisit it for any reason brings "butterflies" in our stomachs. We are thankful there hasn't been a need to fiddle with the code. The structuring of the code is complex and is based on a correct order of the lines. If a line is out of order, things will go awry. However, we must confess to knowing of one bug we discovered three or four years ago (and of which we tend to forget about): on rare occasions this bug will de-capitalise the very first word of a note. We sort-of have a clue as to why, but when we revisited the code, which by then has become unfamiliar to us, we lost courage(**) and rationalised that the bug happens rarely and our users can always switch off the Scan button's own code and only have their user-defined transformations work. Had we discovered the bug while we were in the fiery furnace of first writing the code, we would have fixed it there and then, as we had fixed dozens upon dozens of problems we encountered at the time. The problem now is that when the bug made its first appearance to us it was almost a year after we completed the code. One day we will overcome our fear and go all in to rid the bug once and for all. It will mean re-learning the whys and whereofs of each of the 1,000 lines of code, it will mean treading carefully. That day will be one daunting day, which confessedly we shall put off till our users indicate to us the bug is irritating them. So far (correct as at 15 February 2026), not one user has complained about the bug, perhaps because it is so rare none may have come across it as yet. Crossing our fingers that it will stay as the reason. Nonetheless, we apologise for our lack of courage on this matter (sometimes it's better to "let sleeping dogs lie")(***).

Another complex code-module is the one attached to the Endnote facility (found at the bottom of the Note-Focus card). We dread the day should we have to revisit its code due to the discovery of a bug. So far, it's been working quite well, only rarely causing unexpected results (because of their randomness, we do not define these as bugs), so rare indeed, so lacking a pattern, that, try as we may, we have been unable to pinpoint the cause. Thank goodness they're rare occurrences and it's possible the cause may be extraneous to the code.

In conclusion. Coding in FileMaker Pro is exhilarating: magic happens. Many coding modules are simple and comprise few lines, but just as many are complex and comprise dozens of lines and even hundreds. Understanding the whys and whereofs of the code fades as time passes, even if it is well-commented because the meaning of the comments fade too: one understood what the comments clearly meant when writing them then, but years later the language seems to have become obscure, is difficult to connect to. The Team dreads having to tread back into complex code-modules, but nonetheless wishes to be seen it has the courage to do so should bugs causing major workflow issues are discovered. Though not a major workflow bug, one has eluded the Team and exposed the Team's fear of venturing into complex code of which it has largely lost memory of, due to the passage of time.

Perspective. Please do not get the wrong impression. The Team has tackled far more serious bugs over the seven or eight years of NoteMaker's existence. Some so serious we've had to rewrite the code. Our guess is that there have been well over 100 errors worse than the bug discussed above. If an error causes serious workflow issues we will tackle it: it's just not an option not to do so. However, the fear is always there, but once we commit to correct the error we first approach softly, softly the code-module, read the lines of comments, sometimes trying to "translate" them, then examining each line of actual code in such a way as to regain memory of what we had in mind at the time of writing it ... but we don't take action until all lines of code are examined. We take a step back and ask ourselves what arrangement before us could be connected to the error? In many cases, of breakthrough help have been FileMaker Pro's Data Viewer and, especially, Script Debugger.

(*) Lines of code comprise both the lines of script steps and lines of calculations within some of the script steps.
(**) In an earlier post we declared we would have the courage to fix any known bug. At the time of writing the post (a few days ago), we forgot about this particular bug. The reason for that is because it is rare and the workaround (switching off the Scan button's own code) has lulled us into letting it be.
(***) For the record, the Team, using its real-world version of NoteMaker, "My Notebook", has not encountered the bug for about six months so far, which partly explains why we tend to forget about it.

 

NOTEMAKER'S RE-ORDER-ABLE LIST AND SCOOBY-DOO

The "ReOrderAble list" is a feature we describe as an extension (one of several) to the Note field: it does what would be difficult to do in the Note field, and that is to create a list whose items are easy to move up or down. One of our favourite listings in our real-world version of NoteMaker, "My Notebook", is Scooby-Doo direct-to-video movies (see screenshot on this webpage). We love the Scooby-Doo animated films. We love the friendship among the five forever teens: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy and, of course, the Great Dane, Scooby-Doo (presumably a teenager in dog terms). Most of the films are rendered as 2D cartoons, a couple are Lego rendered and one is puppetry. The quality of the 2D animation is superb. For example, the rain scenes in Stage Fright (2013) are beautifully rendered, creating a wonderful and yet comfortable ambience of a stormy evening. The point is that the order of items changes nearly all the time. Have a look at the top 10 items on the screenshot. They are ...

1. Camp Scare (2010)
2. Big Top (2012)
3. Abracadabra-Doo (2010)
4. Wrestlemania Mystery (2014)
5. Zombie Island (1998)
6. Alien Invaders (2000)
7. Curse of the Speed Demon (2016)
8. Stage Fright (2013)
9. Shaggy's Showdown  (2018)
10. Gourmet Ghost (2018)

However, the top 10 is not quite the same in today's "My Notebook". Instead, as at 14 February 2026, we have ...

1. Camp Scare (2010)
2. Big Top (2012)
3. Wrestlemania Mystery (2014)
4. Stage Fright (2013)
5. Abracadabra-Doo (2010)
6. Zombie Island (1998)
7. Alien Invaders (2000)
8. Curse of the Speed Demon (2016)
9. Shaggy's Showdown  (2018)
10. Gourmet Ghost (2018)

The biggest movement is Stage Fright (2013) from 8th to 4th. Upon re-watching the movie we re-appreciated the daring (and funny) take on the classic novel, The Phantom of the Opera (1910), by French writer, Gaston Leroux. Without wishing to spoil the story for those who haven't yet viewed the Scooby-Doo version, let us say the twists and turns are extremely clever -- and all in the name of fun. Again, it needs repeating, the 2D animation is fantastic. Take, for example, when the teen team goes under the opera house ... the depiction of tunnels and caverns is highly atmospheric. In our re-watching, we picked up on many nuances missed in the first viewing. Characterisation is at a high level, even innovative: we have a midget ventriloquist reverse-role-playing by sitting on the dummy. The reason Stage Fright (2013) didn't take the top spot is because Camp Scare (2010) is a masterpiece in storytelling. And that's the point: we believe plot construction in most of the 37 Scooby-Doo direct-to-video films is equal to any Academy-Award winning film -- there, we said it -- how dare we? We will further be bold in asserting our tastes in films by saying half of the films that have won the Oscar for Best Picture are unwatchable. We give them a chance: we watch the first five or 10 minutes and can't bear to watch more. They're just not our kind of filmic engagement. But the Scooby-Doo direct-to-video films are a sheer pleasure to watch, again and again. They have adventure, mystery, drama and comedy rolled in one. They have quirky characters, engaging (mostly fun) dialogue, clever story strands (that take the teen team around the world), well-drawn settings and predictable but wonderful unmasking of the bad guys at the end. We never tire of hearing the bad guys say: "I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids". But, above all, the films are fun and positive in outlook -- somewhat possibly, just perhaps, therapeutic in a world increasingly inflicted with the doldrums.

It is with sadness that, a few years ago, producers have stopped the franchise from making direct-to-video Scooby-Doo 2D cartoon movies. The franchise was one of a few that could be thoroughly enjoyed by children and adults alike, with all-round high quality of visuals and audio to boot.

"Happy Valentine's Day, may love be with you".

 

WHY FREE?

The question is: why is the Team offering two fantastic applications free of charge? We truly believe the world in general has been kind and generous to us, beyond our expectations. Offering NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner is our way of saying "thank you". There are other reasons. We are not professional developers; we are hobbyists in the purist sense of the word. We love working in FileMaker Pro (FMPro). Creating applications in its rapid development environment is for us thrilling. We in a sense are pushing FMPro beyond the limits expected of the business-oriented platform. This alone is exciting to experience. Being creative in any human endeavour brings incredible joy. And perhaps joy is reward in itself.

 

A QUESTION OF DISTRIBUTION

One problem we seemingly are unable to overcome is distribution. We would love to give every person in the world the chance to access NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner, but we are limited to those who have ownership of, or subscription to, a copy of FMPro. Not only that, but a copy of FMPro is hugely expensive to own (in the hundreds of US dollars). For years we've been positing the idea of a client version of FMPro, which anyone can download, no ownership or subscription required. The way it works is similar to the way Adobe Acrobat Reader works. It is free and universally downloadable. And like the Adobe Acrobat Reader, the, let's call it, "FM Enabler", only makes NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner functional. The "FM Enabler" cannot create databases, it just enables those created in FMPro. To continue the analogy, to create PDF files one needs Adobe Acrobat Pro (or software that have it embedded, such as Word and Final Draft[*]). To create a database, one needs FMPro; the "FM Enabler" cannot create anything, it just makes functional what has already been created in FMPro.

We can't afford to distribute our applications via the Claris FileMaker ecosystem. Our applications are free ... to incur additional costs is not something we are prepared to do. So, we pray that one day, Claris, owners of FMPro, will make available to the world a free client version hypothetically called, "FM Enabler". That is our dream: to give citizens of the world the choice to forever own, free of charge, our two applications.

As it stands, schools and universities that may find NoteMaker possibly useful for their students have to negotiate with Claris a volume-licence agreement to install the full-featured FMPro. Sure, some students may go beyond accessing NoteMaker and take to experimenting in creating databases of all kinds (creating in FMPro is far more exciting than doing same in MS Access), which would be good for both students and Claris, but we believe an "FM Enabler" better serves our purpose.

As things stand, the million around the world who have access to FMPro, have also the chance to download NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner. It's the best we can do. Even to those million, who are overwhelmingly engaging with FMPro for business and organisational ends, we urge you to take the opportunity to download NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner and see if they have use-value for yourself (outside the workplace) or for your family or for your friends.

[*] LibreOffice Writer can also convert its documents to PDF, but we're not sure if The Document Foundation (the organising body which has the final say in what features, offered by volunteers, go in into Writer) has opted for Adobe Acrobat Pro or for an open-source software. Actually, we're not 100%-sure if Word or Final Draft may have also opted for an open-source alternative to Adobe Acrobat Pro.

 

WHAT IS "BUGGING" NOTEMAKER?

NoteMaker is hugely complex (though easy to use). Its(*) development has reached a point that as a self-contained application we find it harder and harder to add to it. If anything, we may have overloaded it with features. It has reached a level where it is hard for us to document and manage. There are areas in NoteMaker we don't wish to revisit as we have no clue how we achieved this and that functionality -- well, not at first. Some stuff we dare not fiddle with, no longer fully knowing the consequences: touch this and something may go wrong somewhere else in the darker recesses of NoteMaker's innards. If there is a bug known to us and presents a workflow issue, we do have the courage to do whatever it takes to fix it, no matter the risks that fixing it may entail. We simply will not let a bug knowingly exist. Though we have let a few minor imperfections go unaddressed -- deliberately, for fear of perfecting them may cause a serious bug somewhere, we, today, 12 February 2026, do not know of the existence of a single bug in NoteMaker. Yet we are aware there must be a bug or two or three somewhere because something as complex as NoteMaker surely cannot be error-free. We just don't know about it, or them, at this stage. Our users will hopefully point them out to us should they come across any one of them. In our real-world version of NoteMaker, called "My Notebook", we don't use anywhere near all the features, only what suits our needs in making notes for ourselves. So, there could be bugs we ourselves may never come across due to our real-world blinkered use of "My Notebook".

So the good news is: as far as we know, NoteMaker is bug-free and working wonderfully. We therefore say (yet again) "you have nothing to lose but the chains of inaction" -- or is it "the chains of inertia"?

(*) Corrected 20 February 2026. We fell for the common error of having written "It's development ...". Twice we've fallen for that error in the past two weeks. We no longer confuse "your" and "you're", "his" and "he's" and the like, but now we are growing sensitive with the use of "its" and "it's". Sure, genAI would have picked up the error, but writing in Microsoft Expression Web 4 is totally free of any kind of oversight, including a spell checker. Normally, we copy and paste into LibreOffice Writer primarily for a spell check. Though Writer picks up on other kinds of errors and wonderfully guesses the next word based on the first few letters, it did not red-flag the erroneous expression "it's development" (Google Docs and Microsoft Word have). The problem with genAI oversight, fantastic as it is (it would have picked up on the error), is that it often makes suggestions for the next block of words. We start to half-lose our personal style of writing if we kind-of lazily take up most of the suggestions. We are writing what genAI wishes, itself being trained on what most other humans write. In other words, genAI, going beyond its marvellous basic corrections ("it's development" to "its development") and guessing the next word, can become a two-edged sword: its suggestions are great when you can't think of what and how to write the next block of words, but can be "harmful" to one's style of writing (or self-expression) if we easily and habitually accede to its block-suggestions. It's the age-old human paradox when accepting help from another: is it worth losing one's independence?

 

IS NOTEMAKER A STUDENTS "BEST FRIEND"?

We humbly believe it could be. And for the strangest of reasons: it doesn't have direct genAI. There is nothing chatbot-ty about NoteMaker. Instead, NoteMaker is raw: all falls back on your intelligence, your research skills and your decisions. You are in charge of training your intellect -- this is the favour NoteMaker does for you. The Team concedes it may not get you the kind of high marks that a chatbot (such as ChatGPT) could deliver by doing the online exams, assignments and essays for you, but, "at the end of the day", we believe a perceptive employer will distinguish between an interviewee with the requisite skills and required knowledge and an interviewee who has largely outsourced one's skills and knowledge to a chatbot while at university.

The Team is making this whacko prediction: we believe universities will take to NoteMaker -- because of what it stands for -- and negotiate with Claris, owners of FileMaker Pro, for a volume-licence agreement that hopefully sees a small fee per student who use their incredible software to access NoteMaker. We strongly believe this will happen, perhaps not in the near future, but it will happen. Chatbots can't be allowed to continue like the monster in the 1958 Steve McQueen film, The Blob, swallowing the intelligence and skills of students.

The irony is intense. As the world becomes ever more receptive to genAI, as it should, NoteMaker will become that much more treasured for not being part of that world, for being a safe haven for the development of human intelligence and intellectual self-reliance.

Imagine this: some students addicted to chatbots suddenly come face-to-face with NoteMaker's largely genAI-free environment. It will be a cold-turkey moment that we can foresee some students may not "survive", and may, with great relief, fallback on their addiction to chatbots. To these students, we humbly advise: go slow, keep your reliance on your preferred chatbot, but, on the quiet, tamper with NoteMaker, just here and there; in other words, slowly wean yourself off chatbots at a non-disturbing pace. When self-reliance wins over reliance on chatbots (and the empowerment that goes with self-reliance is felt deeply), then use chatbots merely as a research tool (which NoteMaker allows on its internet research layout), whose results will now be viewed with a critical eye and in need of corroboration and direct referencing of other sources. In other words, use chatbots as a pointer to verifiable sources, which, after all, is how chatbots compile their information, but instead of chatbots doing it, you do it. It's "hard yakka", for sure, but it brings its own rewards: you're doing the research and along the way other points of interest may come your way.

One may very well take pity on academics who may be feeling more and more an unnecessary factor in the teaching process. Whereas chatbots may make students "lazy" in reaching higher levels as independent thinkers and researchers that they could be, chatbots may make academics that less vital as facilitators of rigorous scholarship. Without the Team wishing to be self-promoting, it just may be in the interest of academics to expose students to NoteMaker (or other largely non-genAI note-making applications) in the hope that the data processor may trigger in students a sense of ownership of the processes involved in gaining knowledge and skills and may excite a renewed interest in attending lectures and tutorials; that is to say, for students to more partner with their lecturers and tutors than with ChatGPT.

DISCLAIMER. The above is a take on a certain reality that may not be the reality as seen by others.

 

TRADITIONAL PROGRAMMING VS GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

The Team has been struggling for some time trying to understand generative artificial intelligence (genAI). We are traditional programmers within the scope of FileMaker Pro (FMPro), with a little understanding of C++, to boot. We are trying to come to terms with programming to the central processing unit (CPU) and the utilisation of the graphics processing unit (GPU). We are at this stage arriving to this conclusion: that traditional programming has 100 per cent certainty, whereas genAI training models have less than certainty. The more genAI is trained on data the closer it comes to certainty, but, we believe, never achieving such. Claude is being exposed to millions of online books; its ability to write a faultless book increases with increasing exposures. It will one day get to 99 per cent of certainty. After hypothetical exposure to (or trained on) a billion books, it will get to 99.9999999 per cent of certainty, but never 100 per cent. That's because training with large language models and large graphic models are based on statistical probabilities. To better understand this notion, let's revert to basics. When the Team programs in FMPro, one plus one equals two, always. Here is an actual programming module of 10 lines used by the Team for a button for ScriptPlanner's User Manual (green represents comments; they are not code as such):

// PURPOSE: to clear the User Manual for reasons of updating.
// ATTACHED to an "invisible" button at the footer of the User Manual layout.
// PROVISO. It is meant to be temporary, while ScriptPlanner is under construction.
Set Field [Manual::Manual; ""]
// ... this line of code will empty the User Manual field of any content.
// ... (the Clear script step does not break through the non-enterable field, whereas the Set Field script step does).
Scroll Window [Home]
// ... to bring the focus back up to the top.
Commit Record/Request [With dialog: Off]
// ... saves and to make sure the field stays non-enterable (by users).

The three lines of code (shown above in blue) work 100 per cent of the time (they are the 1 + 1 = 2). This is traditional programming and why it remains essential -- and, we believe, always will be -- despite the onslaught of the minor miracle that is genAI.

When driving a new car, sensors provide information for code to act on. These decisions are made by traditional coding. For example, while in cruise-control mode, a sensor will pick up the vehicle ahead and if it slows down, the brakes of our car will automatically be applied to slow us also. The code may work this way (using pseudo-code):

IF cruise-control is set at 100 km/h AND the sensor says the vehicle ahead is 25 metres away, apply brakes slightly to ensure a distance of at least 35 metres.

Traditional programming provides the absolute necessity for 100 per cent certainty that the above scenario will apply (not withstanding, say, mud covering the sensor or, say, damage is done to the sensor -- reasons why one member of the Team believes a human should always be behind the steering wheel, never genAI alone, for it too depends on sensors working 100 per cent, all the time).

In conclusion: traditional programming provides 100 per cent certainty whereas genAI provides higher and higher probabililty (with increased training) of getting closer to certainty but never quite reaching it.

DISCLAIMER. None of the above (save for the 10-line code module) should be taken at face value. It is crucial that readers verify, corroborate and, more so, challenge all assertions made above. The above is meant only to excite research, not as the final word on anything.

 

THINGS ARE LOOKING GOOD

There comes a time when the Team can say with confidence that its two applications, NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner, have reached a level of maturity that any one who has access to FileMaker Pro (aka Claris FileMaker) but has not yet downloaded one or the other application is "silly" ("silly" used here affectionately). Both applications are free and highly sophisticated. Once you have FileMaker Pro installed on your laptop or desktop, all you need do is download either application, then drag and drop from your Download folder onto your desktop, double-click to open (at first it may take several seconds to launch) ... and that's it. Your ownership of, or subscription to, Claris FileMaker has been enriched by the addition of either of these two incredible data processors. Not 100 per cent happy? Simply delete the file icon representing either. Gone, as if never there in the first place (in other words, no uninstalling required whatsoever). "It just doesn't get better than that", one may say. Why wait? Go to the bottom of this webpage and download NoteMaker or ScriptPlanner.

Not having direct generative artificial intelligence (genAI) is meant to be the "kiss of death" for both applications in today's increasingly genAI-layered world; but, on the contrary, it's one of their best "selling points". It's your intelligence meeting directly the challenges of the tasks these two applications present to you -- no genAI as intermediary, no shortcuts. We boldly predict this: the more the world succumbs to the brilliancy of genAI, the more of a haven will the raw offerings of NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner increase. GenAI is fantastic: you see it when it wonderfully predicts the likely next word when you're messaging and when Grok can turn a mere photo into a short video. These are nothing less than minor miracles. Just as traditional programming (primarily via the CPU) provides certainty -- and increasingly valued for such -- genAI (primarily via the GPU) can never provide 100 per cent certainty since it is ultimately based on high probabilities (one member of the Team refuses to knowingly drive within the vicinity of a driverless vehicle because of the possibility that a one-in-a-million situation may arise for which genAI has not been trained). The Team argues in respect to genAI: be careful not to become a member of the passive race of "Eloi" (~ humans) ruled over by the active race of "Morlocks" (~ genAI) (*). NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner ensure you keep your mind active every step of the way. While in either application, you are your own intelligence -- it's essentially the only state NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner will allow you to be in.

In conclusion, don't be "silly" and miss the incredible opportunity offered to you as owners of, or subscribers to, FileMaker Pro to access forever and for free two wonderful applications, NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner, which provide environments free of direct genAI; here, instead of training genAI, you train your own intelligence.

(*) "Eloi" and "Morlocks" are terms used in HG Wells's 1895 novel, The Time Machine.

 

SCRIPTPLANNER 1.1.8.2 IS NOW 1.1.8.3

Today, 5 February 2026, is witness to the release of the latest update to ScriptPlanner. Nearly all that has been done for the update is to revise the User Manual.

 

UPDATE ANNOUNCEMENT: SCRIPTPLANNER 1.1.8.2

Today, 2 February 2026, the NoteMaker Team has again "sadly" lost its will to reduce the number of updates when it comes to ScriptPlanner. (On the other hand, the Team is doing great with NoteMaker: for several months now, it is still on version 2.5.4).

ScriptPlanner 1.1.8.1 has been updated to 1.1.8.2. A small update indeed, but it does introduce what we consider is a big improvement to the Scenario popover.

BACKSTORY. The Scenario popover is the most intelligent feature ScriptPlanner has to offer. It is an environment for screenwriters to create a proto-script or, in other words, a collection of raw fragmented script bits for each event (scene or episode) -- that is to say, an environment for toying around (experimenting) with action lines and pieces of dialogue.

WHAT DOES THE 1.1.8.2 UPDATE DO? It improves the flow of proto-scripting by making it possible for screenwriters to create a row for an action line or for dialogue -- without recourse to the mouse(*) -- by pressing the Tab key (while the cursor is in the current Action/Dialogue field);  if instead you wish it to be a character row, press the Down Arrow key (while the cursor is in the new Action/Dialogue field), select the character by using the now normalised Down Arrow key and press Enter/Return. The result is that one's fingers remain on the keyboard for the common task of creating a row, thus improving efficiency.

(We beg forgiveness for not updating the User Manual to reflect the recent changes. We'll soon set ourselves the task of doing so).

(*) However, using the mouse is necessary for creating the very first row.

 

NEW DATA CENTRES: CPU vs GPU

In the last six months, the big tech companies building huge data centres, especially for developing generative artificial intelligence (genAI), are more and more realising it is not all about the GPUs (the chips that deliver a billion parallel operations that make possible graphics, such as pictures, 3D renderings and videos, and also genAI), but that the CPUs have become ever-more necessary. The metaphor is this: the CPUs are the brains and GPUs provide the hard labour. Both need each other: hard labour (GPU) is aimless without guided supervision (CPU).

This is where Intel, the company that historically makes most of the CPUs for laptops and desktops, has been caught out. When CEO Pat Gelsinger left the company, the new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, reduced Intel's capacity to make CPUs in order to stop the company bleeding money (possibly also overwhelmed, like so many of us, by the lopsided cry: "in today's world, it's all about genAI's need for GPUs"), only to be caught unprepared for the surge in demand in the last six months by new data centres for old-style CPUs for their servers.

The lesson possibly is this: discern better what is propagandish justifying a "mad rush" to something new and what is "steady-as-she-goes" perspective; in other words, keeping the balance by weighing the elements that are making the new reality with the solid elements from the old reality. The big tech companies are realising that CPUs are just as important as GPUs for operations in their new data centres housing large language models that train genAI. The historically great company, Intel, unless it can quickly redirect its resources, has likely missed a golden opportunity that was just "made for it".

DISCLAIMER. The above is only an opinion and not an expert one at that. Every statement made above should be critically examined by readers, for they are made by hobbyists whose only notable expertise is in creating applications (NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner) using FileMaker Pro. Please note in general: every opinion given by the Team is done only in the spirit of providing "food for thought".

 

SCRIPTPLANNER NOW 1.1.8.1

ScriptPlanner has been updated today (25 January 2026) from 1.1.8 to 1.1.8.1. The littlest of changes has been made. On the Project Overview, specifically on the Plot tab, pressing the Enter/Return key will now result with the pointing triangle being created two paragraphs down instead of one paragraph down.

 

SCRIPTPLANNER JUMPS FROM 1.1.6 TO 1.1.8

Can those who love ScriptPlanner keep a secret? On the quiet, ScriptPlanner has gone from 1.1.6 to 1.1.8. The Team almost vowed to stay with 1.1.6 for a long time – unless a bug was discovered that would hamper workflow. The good news is that no major bug has been discovered, but little improvements have been made to the Project Overview popover, such that in some cases it may provide all the planning needed before jumping into the screenwriting software of your choice. The improvements are as follows ...

First, a new tab has been included, labelled “Cast”, which, for reasons of space, is short for a “list of characters” rather than for a list of actors and actresses. Before you begin planning your project in earnest, you have the opportunity to give a rough outline of – and name – the possible characters involved in the story.

Second, the order of the tabs has been changed in the belief it would improve workflow. The new order is: “Cast”, “Plot”, “Strands”, “Notes”, “Series”, “To Do” and “Synopsis”. “Synopsis” is last because in a way it is putting together the contents of most of the other tabs in a presentable narrative for others (eg, producers) to read. “Cast” is first in the belief one may wish to have some idea of the characters before noting down the plot pointers and story strands.

Third, “Cast”, “Plot”, “Strands” and “To Do” tabs have the facility to create bullet points.

Finally, a little bug fix: a scroll bar has been inserted for the “Series” tab.

The result is that the Project Overview environment has evolved to a degree that it now may be all that is needed for preliminary planning before beginning to write the screenplay in your preferred screenwriting software. This is an incredible development in ScriptPlanner that began with 1.1.6 and further developed in 1.1.7 (unreleased) and 1.1.8.

Imagine outlining your story to a degree that you may not need to create a single record in the database – all done on the Project Overview popover. Wow!

But, “keep it hush”, please. By going to 1.1.8, we have “betrayed” our determination to stay with 1.1.6 for a very long time. But try planning on the Project Overview popover in 1.1.8 for yourself … you just may be glad we did bring out the update. Our recommendation is to stay on 1.1.6 for your current project and use 1.1.8 for the next project.

We wish all a happy and creative new year 2026!

 

AN OPEN LETTER FROM THE MAKERS OF NOTEMAKER

Dear owners of, and subscribers to, FileMaker Pro,

       The NoteMaker Team comprises two amateur hobbyists who obtain creative joy from building databases (eg, NoteMaker and ScriptPlanner) on a remarkable platform called FileMaker Pro (FMPro), one of the best put-together software from anywhere in the world.

        We wish to offer a copy of our NoteMaker (NM) program to you totally free of charge, no strings attached, forever yours. We believe you shouldn't hesitate to download a copy of NM for the simple reason you have absolutely nothing to lose but always with the possibility of value-adding to your copy of FMPro should NM "prove to be the goods".

        The thing is this: when you download NoteMaker you are only downloading the file, not the application. NM only becomes an application when opened by a preinstalled copy of FMPro. The beaut thing is: if you are not 100 per cent happy with NM, merely delete the file, end-of-story, no uninstalling required. There is no system-level interference with your computer's innards.

        By trialling NoteMaker, there is the chance you may find you are one with its rationale and workflow. For years now we've been testing NM's real-world version called "My Notebook" and we have never seriously looked at any other (most likely fantastic) professional note-making software out there. The more we use "My Notebook", the more we've come to love NoteMaker; the more we use "My Notebook", the better NoteMaker has evolved. At version 2.5.4, NM has become a superbly mature note-making tool. If you love FMPro, you may love NM as an expression of what can be done on this wonderful database-creation platform (owned by Claris, a subsidiary of Apple).

        Every feature and function in NoteMaker has been built from the ground up with the tools and objects available from FMPro. NM has no module from a third party vendor as, for example, the wonderful novel-writing enabler, Scrivener, is believed to have (and perhaps many others too). The simple but nifty calendar in NM was wholly built from scratch on the FMPro platform. If nothing else, owners of, or subscribers to, a copy of FMPro may do well to have a look at what their beloved software can produce. You'll be amazed that out of a supposedly business-oriented, database-creation platform that is FileMaker Pro can come an application, NoteMaker, that simulates some word-processing features that are essential to making notes.

        In a world being overwhelmed with the miracle that is generative artificial intelligence (genAI), NoteMaker is refreshingly free of direct genAI. NM is a space or sanctuary where you may exercise, at every turn, your intelligence. In a case of counter-intuitive irony, we hope NM being free of direct genAI is its best "selling point" in today's increasingly AI-dominated world.

        In conclusion. To our way of thinking it doesn't make sense not to try NoteMaker if you are fortunate to have access to FileMaker Pro: NoteMaker is free, it doesn't need installing, can be deleted with just two quick clicks, yet it could turn out to be a wonderful addition to what you can do with your copy of FMPro. You may come, like we have, to love NoteMaker. All we ask is to try NoteMaker for yourself. Download it today(*). You have absolutely nothing to lose but the chains of inertia.

Sincerely,
The NoteMaker Team

(*We recommend obtaining your copy of NoteMaker by downloading from this website. It's always possible that corrupt, reverse-engineered or outdated copies may be in circulation [**]. By downloading from our website you are guaranteed the best and latest version. A preinstalled copy of FileMaker Pro [version 18, 19, 20, 21 or 22] is necessary. NoteMaker has not been scaled for downloading on mobile devises [tablets and smartphones]: please only download to your laptop or desktop. NoteMaker is fine with the Mac and Windows operating systems).

[** With our beloved NoteMaker we aim for the highest standards in every aspect of the application. If you have obtained a copy by means other than from this website and find something strange, untoward, ambiguous or, worse, rude in any of our text (field labels, tooltips, the manual,) or graphics, please delete the reversed-engineered file and download a fresh unadulterated copy from our facility at the bottom of this webpage. We are strict on ourselves to keeping to the very highest standards {and morally speaking, to a strong sense of decency} and we will not allow ourselves to tolerate substandards of any kind {***}].

{*** If an aspect of NoteMaker causes offence, please let us know immediately by using the Contact Form (subject: "offence taken") and please explain clearly where and what is the offence}.

 

Is NoteMaker good for students? Two decades ago one member of the Team formulated a hypothesis for effective summarising called Essay Paragraph Construction (EPC) theory. It is based on a five-sentence template for each paragraph.
1st sentence: make an assertion (generally speaking, please keep it "short and sweet")
2nd sentence: elaborate on the assertion
3rd sentence: support the assertion with a piece of evidence (a fact, statistic, quotation, paraphrase)
4th sentence: discuss the assertion in relation to the evidence (perhaps exhibit evidence-weighing or source-management skills)
5th sentence: exit(*).

If you're a member of the general public using NoteMaker you may simply wish to make notes. If you're a student you may instead wish to write summaries. If you tick the EPC checkbox on the bottom of NoteMaker's home page, the gateway opens to the world of guided summarising. The Note field now has as its placeholder the five-sentence types. Students also have access to a sampling of 11 fully annotated summaries.

The five-sentence template is only a guide. Rarely need there be five sentences to each paragraph. Often, paragraphs may comprise two, three, four ... six, seven or more sentences (see sampler). But each paragraph should always begin with an assertion (or, put another way, begin by making a point to be argued for)

The thing about summaries adhering (even roughly) to EPC theory is that their structure possibly makes them essay-ready. When students are given an essay question to write to, they may already have summaries ready (perhaps needing a tweak or two) to be implanted as body paragraphs.

(* The exit sentence is the most dynamic as it can go from merely summing-up the paragraph, to merely reasserting the assertion, to renergising the current paragraph by being a gateway for more sentences, to acting as a pivot to the assertion for the next paragraph or to dynamically challenge the assertion and by doing so present a reformulation of the original assertion [but without changing the original assertion in the first sentence, testimony you are open to be influenced by the evidence and arguments presented], thus making for a rather dramatic "exit". It is also the sentence you may wish to imbue with your personality, to write with flourish; whereas the four other sentence-types may need to be more clinical).

 

Tab overhaul in ScriptPlanner's Project Overview popover.

Today (4 December 2025), the Team has redone the tabs in ScriptPlanner's Project Overview popover.

Tab	Placeholder Text
Plot	"Plot pointers"
Strands	"Story strands"
Synopsis	"Story summary for others to read (public document)"
Notes	"Notes"
Series	"List of other titles if a series"
To Do	"To-do list"

We believe this is a more useful presentation of the tab group. The new To Do tab is a bland, straightforward representation of the Task Manager popover situated at the footer of the Event page.

Normally, we would pass on to our users what we believe is an improvement, but we will keep to the new policy of holding back improvements to allow for their accumulation over time.

We are currently testing the new-look tab group in our real-world version of ScriptPlanner to see if in fact the grouping is more useful than the previous one in preplanning screenplays and TV/streaming series.

 

Experience, in our case, wins over theory. Our continued real-world use of "My Notebook" shows the way for the development of NoteMaker. One of the new features for the visual calendar is the checkbox, "Always show current", situated at the footer of the calendar, which, for one thing, every time you go to the calendar from the home page, you'll always be presented with the current month of the current year. Experience with "My Notebook", "tells us" that it should be the default, that it should always be the case. However, two factors will prevent us ridding the choice the checkbox offers: our pledge not to update NoteMaker for the next few months (in other words, keep everything as is) and the general idea that it's always good to give users choices. Theory leads the way but experience demonstrates the way.

 

The way the new Personal Found Set works. The Personal Found Set facility is a great new feature of NoteMaker. It allows users to make fluid found sets of their own, forever retrievable. The facility is situated at the bottom of the directory on the home page and in the footer on the Collection layout.

Users may store up to 13(*) Personal Found Sets. The way it works is this: whatever the current found set shows in the directory (on the home page) or listed on the Collection layout can be captured, saved and retrieved at any time. The operation is similar to that of saving finds via normal NoteMaker searches: for example by going into Find mode, entering the criterion "health" in the Contextual Statement field, clicking the Perform Find button, and, say, 11 notes are displayed, which are automatically saved and listed as "health" by NoteMaker.

Personal Found Sets operate slightly different: they are more flexible, they can be personalised. Say of the 11 notes on "health", you omit one, the remaining 10 can be saved as a Personal Found Set by:
1. clicking the "Storage for Personal Found Sets" popover button;
2. once the popover appears, click the Capture button (with the down arrow icon) and name your now personalised found set, say, "My Health". Done;
3. anytime you wish to make your personalised found set reappear, click the Load button (with the up arrow icon) on the popover;
4. your personalised found set of 10 notes on "My Health" reappear;
5. but it gets better; say, you wish to add a note to the 10, perhaps from the Collection label, "Medicine"; easy, simply click the green plus + button (when your personalised "My Health" found set is showing in the directory), enter the contextual statement (or part thereof) of the note you wish to add and click the Add Note button. Your Personal Found Set now has 11 notes;
6. PLEASE NOTE: the new personalised found set must be recaptured by clicking the Capture button.

One senses how that much more powerful (useful) NoteMaker is with the wonderful feature called Personal Found Sets. Try it, we can almost guarantee you'll love it.

(* 13 is an arbitrary figure. We did this for one reason: we wanted to make all Personal Found Sets visible all at once without scrolling. Almost a limitless number of Personal Found Sets could be had if we created a related table, but as stated previously we did not desire out-of-immediate-view Personal Found Sets. The premise for this is that a Personalised Found Set is precious and should be in view on the popover with the others. We are crossing our fingers the great majority of our users will never need more than 13 Personal Found Sets. [Please note: it will help if Personal Found Sets do not merely duplicate normal saved finds as listed on the thin vertical strip popover button next to the large Find button on the top wide toolbar]. We recognise for some people 13 is an unlucky number; we could have increased the number of Personal Found Sets to 14 or to a maximum of 15 but our desire was to have the popover leave visible at least two of the contextual statements as listed in the directory in the interest of orientation.
Added 22 November 2025, revised 23 November 2025. The Team is having some regrets not having gone to 14 or 15 Personal Founds Sets. The problem in doing so now is the complexity involved. We could have done it then when we knew exactly what we were doing, but now we're confessedly anxious in re-engaging with that complexity because our memory of the subtle bits and pieces has largely gone due to the passage of time. The fault lies with us: we failed to document all the nuances involved in creating new rows of Personal Found Sets. However, what may save us from having to re-engage as developers with Personal Found Sets any time soon is our new policy to keep NoteMaker 2.5.4 as is for the foreseeable future. Nonetheless, please let us know what you think of the limit of 13 Personal Found Sets. How important to you is viewing two contextual statements from the directory for the purpose of orientation? If you are happy with 13, we'll be happy too; if we have to re-learn how to add an extra row or two, that is fine too, we are not without the courage to re-engage with complexity).

 

 

Who may benefit from using ScriptPlanner and NoteMaker?

• RE SCRIPTPLANNER
• screenwriters wishing to do preliminary "fleshing out" of a story-idea
• scriptwriters of TV/streaming series, who may wish to plan the overall series and each individual episode
• perhaps novelists who may wish to outline their story-ideas or detail some aspects (though Scrivener has fantastic planning tools for novelists)
• RE NOTEMAKER
• students wishing to gather and organise information and write summaries
• collectors of philosophical wisdom or wise takes on life
• cooks wishing to store recipes
• coders wishing to replicate code for learning purposes or as references
• collecters of interesting facts
• people who like making lists of things (eg, one's own top 50 films)
• diarists and keepers of journals to record and track life experiences
• researchers who wish to systematise pointers to their findings
• traditional FileMaker users curious to see some amazing things FileMaker Pro has been made to do in NoteMaker
• generally, anyone who wishes to record bits and pieces of information

ScriptPlanner and NoteMaker help, allow and enable you to ...

• RE SCRIPTPLANNER
• plan in detail each scene (or what ScriptPlanner calls "event")
• provide time and place for each event
• delineate character almost to the nth degree by having characters "answer" a questionnaire
• facilitate a character's arc
• outline or detail episodes in a series
• position markers for Acts
• script preliminary chunks of dialogue
• track a subplot strand
• RE NOTEMAKER
• write, store, search and manage thousands of notes in the one file
• organise groups of notes under collection labels (categories) and sub-labels (sub-categories)
• link one note directly to another
• make some notes stand out from the rest by entering them in the Mark Special popover
• (specially for students) write effective summaries via scaffolding and fully explained Essay Paragraph Construction (EPC) theory
• create keywords, which NoteMaker will track and list on a per-note basis
• transform abbreviations (eg, "wsj" to "Wall Street Journal")
• make use of a two-tiered to-do list (one on the Keyword field adjacent to the Note field and the other for an overall to do list
• schedule events with NoteMaker's new visual calendar or via Event Notes
• access the manual, About NoteMaker, (situated within the NoteMaker file)

ScriptPlanner and NoteMaker have limitations ...

• configured only for the hard disc drives or solid state drives of desktops and laptops, not cloud-based
• not scalable, but will fit screen aspect ratios 16:9, 16:10 and 3:2 of desktops and laptops in full-screen mode
• entirely developed in Windows; the feeling, however, is that NoteMaker should render okay with the Mac OS; and feedback (via a screenshot) from a Beta-Tester has shown that ScriptPlanner's Event page renders perfectly on a Mac machine
• dates are in the British format, day/month/year (unless FileMaker automatically transcribes dates to month/day/year for American users)
• available only in English

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshots ScriptPlanner & NoteMaker

(Please note: the Event and Character pages — see the following screenshots — are where you will likely spend most of your time in ScriptPlanner)

Fig: Event page.

Some pointers regarding the image ...

• it's easy to see ScriptPlanner is purely a database application (note the word, "records" in the top toolbar)
• each event (commonly known as a scene) is equal to one record in the database
• the row of popover buttons along the bottom of the Event page lead to environments to further detailing the event
• events (scenes or episodes) can be linked to each other (as reference points one to the other)
• the big empty space to the left is the directory of event (scene or episode) titles
• it's possible to track one subplot strand
• dividers are provided to separate groups of events (scnes); for example, Acts

 

 Time to have a look at the Character page ...

Fig: Character page.

Some pointers regarding the image ...

• the Beat popover button next to the character's name leads to a portal for listing the key moments in the character's life (before and) during the story (and even after the story)
• a facility is provided for character arcs
• the Role Status field is accompanied by an embedded list comprising
• protagonist
• antagonist
• primary character
• secondary character
• tertiary character
• one-off character
• prominent non-speaking role
• the Profile popover button opens to a portal, which is fed into from the Questionnaire layout

 

 Time to have a look at NoteMaker's home page ...

Fig: NoteMaker's home page.

Some pointers regarding the image ...

• the idea behind the design of the home page is to have many functions in proximity to the Note field
• the big empty space on the left is the directory, which lists the headings (contextual statements) of notes (currently empty because no note has been created)
• the Collection field is a means of grouping notes by tagging them with labels (eg, contextual statement = "James Dean", collection label = "Biography")
• Notes can also be linked to each other to create a network-like connections
• if you think the home page is cluttered, a new decluttering checkbox has been introduced (it is situated to the left of the Note-Focus button)

 

 NoteMaker decluttered ...

 

Fig: NoteMaker in declutter mode.

Some pointers regarding the image ...

• in declutter mode, only the essential functions and fields show
• though aesthetically cleaner-looking, the home page loses quicker access to certain functions
• the irony is the Hide checkbox itself is almost hidden (it is next to the Note-Focus Card button - a faint tiny square is possibly seeable in the above image with a magnifying glass)
• the go-to calendar button remains to encourage users to check their calendar
• the Set Due Date button is temporary: once it isn't clicked before a field is filled it will permanently disappear (when clicked, the note becomes an event-note, a calendar item [by the bye, not related to the visal calendar])

 

 Time to have a look at NoteMaker's ReOrderAble list ...

Fig: NoteMaker's ReOrderAble list extension.

Some pointers regarding the screenshot ...

• the ReOrderAble list is one of several options that extend the reach of the Note field
• list whatever you like (eg, your top 50 films, your favourite novels or top 10 recipes)
• items on the list can have their order easily repositioned
• new to v1.4.0 is creating and linking a list-item to a note (notice the new Link button [with the search icon] next to the Delete button).
• when on the home page from the ReOrderAble list a Return button (shown above with a sort-of red "cross" on the left margin) will take you back to the list with the originating item highlighted
• the ReOrderAble list makes for a fantastic sub-directory of notes

 

 Time to have a look at NoteMaker's Storyboard ...

Fig: NoteMaker's Storyboard extension to the Note field.

Some pointers regarding the screenshot ...

• Lon Chaney is one of the greatest actors of the silent-film era; the image is from the 1923 version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Another fantastic version is the 1939 film, starring Charles Laughton as the hunchback, Quasimodo.
• storyboards are great for depicting many aspects of life, nature and the universe that have cycles, stages or phases
• storyboards combine visual frames and text (as captions)
• most often, however, the Storybaord extesnion will be used for storing single images (as shown above) or links to documents

Questions and Responses

Why ScriptPlanner?

ScriptPlanner provides a purely database approach to planning screenplays. It provides a level of granularity probably unmatched by any other planning environment for screenplays.

Is ScriptPlanner every screenwriter's dream?

No. Far from it: it could be a nightmare for some screenwriters. It comes down to one's comfort level in working with database systems. Databases tend to be "cut and dry" environments.

As a screenwriter, how should I approach ScriptPlanner?

There are over a hundred fields and dozens of features in ScriptPlanner and yet they need not all be used. It's a little bit of a paradox that the less fields filled, the more poignant become the contents of those fields that are filled.

What is the history behind ScriptPlanner?

Development of ScriptPlanner began about six years ago, but it was a project that received scant attention, the focus always having been on NoteMaker. It is only in the last 16 or 17 months that all resources were put into accelerating ScriptPlanner's development. The effort was frenetic: metaphorically speaking, little time was taken to breathe-in air. There was a period that for a stretch of 12 days a communication blackout was put in place to ensure minimal distraction: it's as if to make atonement for the years of neglect. Exhaustion reigned as testing was relentless to ensure errors are "as scarce as hen's teeth". However, after all that, there is the wonderful result: ScriptPlanner version 1.1.6 is now a wonderfully mature product.

Why use ScriptPlanner when, for example, Final Draft 13 has wonderful planning tools?

Without a doubt, the planning tools in Final Draft and other screenwriting software are superb. However, Final Draft's current v13 does not have a page template for each character's description and backstory (correct as up to 17 November 2025); instead each character has a dedicated row in a spreadsheet, which over time may become cluttered. As a data processor, ScriptPlanner not only provides a page ("record", in database parlance) per character but also links to other internal environments to further delineate character.

Can ScriptPlanner ever replace, say, Final Draft?

Never. For one thing, a screenplay cannot be written in ScriptPlanner. Secondly, Final Draft's planning tools are symbiotic: ongoing planning and writing the screenplay go hand-in-hand in the same workspace (these in-script planning tools are called "Outline Elements" in Final Draft and they're nothing less than marvels).

Who are likely to take to ScriptPlanner?

Unfortunately, not many. For one thing budding screenwriters are unlikely to have too strong an inclination to be involved with business-oriented database-creation software such as FileMaker Pro.

What's in it for those who are screenwriters who have access to FileMaker and also take to ScriptPlanner?

An extremely useful planning tool that works on many levels. The NoteMaker Team is hard-pressed to think what can't be done with ScriptPlanner in terms of preplanning screenplays.

 

 

Why NoteMaker?

NoteMaker attempts to make writing notes that are highly searchable and easy to link and group.

 

Is NoteMaker easy to learn?

Its basic worklow is as easy as 1>2>3: click the New Note button, (1.) fill in the heading (contextual statement), press Tab, (2.) select or formulate a collection label, press Enter, and finally (3.) write the note.
(The NoteMaker Team recommends keeping to the basic workflow and only use other features on a need-to basis. For example, if a list requires only three items, keep it within the Note Field; if a list comprises 30 items consider the ReOrderAble list extension).

 

Should I use just the one file for all my notes?

It's convenient to keep everything in the one place. On the other hand, it could spell clutter. NoteMaker's facility for collection labels and sub-labels help manage all your notes in the one file. For the general user, the NoteMaker Team recommends using the one file (however, students may have multi-purpose files; eg, one for Modern History and another for Ancient History).

 

What if you have over 1,000 notes? Surely, clutter will reign.

NoteMaker has been especially designed not to feel cluttered whether there are 10 notes or a million notes. ("My Notebook" is the name of the test NoteMaker file the Team is currently using, which, up to 17 November 2025, has 1,718 notes — the Team will testify that there is no sense of clutter with the 1,718 real-world notes: it feels the same as if there were only 100 notes).

 

If all in one file, what name is suggested for the file?

"My Notes" or "My Notebook" or any other generalised yet descriptive title you see fitting. Please bear in mind, by centralising all notes in the one file, NoteMaker's visual calendar becomes the single go-to calendar.

 

How does NoteMaker compete with other note-making programs?

It doesn't. NoteMaker approaches making notes in its own way. Some people will take to the approach and others won't. NoteMaker's approach centres on being a data processor rather than a word processor.

 

In what way is NoteMaker specially helpful for students?

NoteMaker has an exposition called Essay Paragraph Construction (EPC) theory that, coupled with detailed examples, may help students write more effective standalone (or essay-ready) summaries.

 

So NoteMaker isn't for everbody, only students?

The part of NoteMaker dedicated to students is only a tiny fraction of the coverage offered by the application. NoteMaker is a general-purpose application, intended for all who love making notes.

Please fill out the form below to touch bases with the NoteMaker Team

 

(Many thankyous to Google for making it easy to create the structure for a workable contact form).