Table of contents
🤖
AI-generated summary
Comparing two apps with different philosophies is tricky — and yet these two have more in common than it first appears. Ulysses aims to be a writing-focused app, particularly for long-form writing and novels. Drafts is more geared toward note-taking — everything is designed to capture a note as quickly as possible.
My everyday use for both apps is publishing blog posts. Each one does the job, with its own set of strengths and weaknesses.
Why am I even asking this question? I’ve been using Ulysses for several years, but switching to a subscription model is making me rethink my choices. Ulysses costs €40 a year, while Drafts costs only half that. Does a €20 difference justify switching to Drafts?
Drafts
Automation First
I was never a big fan of Drafts — the interface is really geared toward power users. I always thought the app wasn’t designed to store notes, but rather to route them from Drafts to other apps. Drafts lets you create “actions,” and since version 5 they’re scriptable. So it’s easy to transform one or multiple notes and send them to other apps.
Customization
Drafts lets you customize the interface. It supports two modes — light and dark — and can switch between them automatically. Each mode is customizable via built-in themes.
Some modes are missing that would make it a more pleasant editor, like the “TypeWriter” mode in Ulysses.
The various toolbars are customizable, and you can have different shortcuts depending on your writing mode. Ultimately, the sheer number of options means there’s something for everyone.
The Interface
The interface is pretty austere at first glance. The app is less about writing and more about fast note capture. Think of Drafts as an entry point from which you dispatch notes to other destinations.
For instance, the app can create multiple reminders in the Reminders app from a single note containing a to-do list.
These kinds of actions are what really show off the power of this app.
I really like the ability to reorder paragraphs and quickly access a document outline from within Drafts. You can see all the chapters at a glance and rearrange them however you like.
Ulysses
Exports
One of Ulysses’ biggest strengths is its wide range of export formats, and the one I like most is ePub. It’s a format I’m planning to use in the future to publish books. Drafts doesn’t support ePub export, and that’s honestly the one thing making me seriously consider staying with Ulysses. Off the top of my head, I don’t know of any other iOS app that lets you create ePub files.
File Format
Another advantage of Ulysses is that it doesn’t treat files as plain text files. It can store images you import directly inside the file. It keeps the flexibility of Word for managing images and attachments, while still keeping the simplicity of writing in markdown.
For me personally, this means I can manage my blog posts in one place. I write the article and can embed images that are permanently saved inside it. That way I keep a copy in Ulysses and a published copy on the site.
The Interface
Ulysses’ interface is designed to please the writer. “TypeWriter” mode is my favorite — it lets you write while keeping the cursor line always at the same height. That makes typing more comfortable and reduces eye strain.
Folder organization feels more natural; while Drafts relies on preset folders (inbox, archive…) and tags, Ulysses uses folders and also lets you tag your articles.
Finally, Ulysses lets you set writing goals. You can also view statistics on your word count. The stats are impressively detailed for the aspiring writer — you’ll find word count with and without spaces, estimated reading time, and more.
Conclusion
In the end, each app has its own strengths and weaknesses. Ultimately, my inner Geek nudges me toward Drafts, but the sheer writing pleasure makes me seriously consider staying with Ulysses. Ulysses’ automation shortcomings can be filled in with the app Scriptable — I’ll cover that separately, but it lets you script all sorts of things, including publishing articles to Hugo or Jekyll .
