Jump to content

derei

Members
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About derei

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Considering that Linux and OSX kernels are pretty similar, or at least derived around UNIX, which makes them to work somewhat similar, would it be so difficult to have a Linux version of Affinity Suite derived from the OSX version? I do understand that coding for Windows and OSX is literally maintaining two different software, but if a Linux version could be easily derived from the OSX version, perhaps the work involved to maintain it would pay off, as it wouldn't actually be a 3rd software. I may be wrong here, but this is why I am raising the question... to find out if this is a possible route. Also, everyone is arguing the EXISTING market, how many users on Windows/OSX/Linux, etc... I don't think this evaluation has any relevance. Yes, this is how is NOW. Bit anyone asked WHY? Is not because Linux is inaccessible, it is because most developers ignored it in the past. But that's not true anymore. Even Steam noticed the relevance of addressing Linux users. It was argued "linux is for nerds". I'd disagree. Linux is NOT ONLY for nerds. Not anymore. Yes, it can be and there are flavors specifically developed for specialized use. But a lot of linux flavors are there for the general public, even tailored for smooth transition from any other popular OS. The increased awareness in data privacy is making more and more users look into privacy friendly software. Artists and Creators are not always ignorant. Many are growing interest in protecting their digital life. So, a patronizing attitude that says "we don't develop for linux because our users aren't informed and educated enough to use linux" is actually offensive towards your clients pool. Moreover, I believe you should be encouraging privacy and good ethics by supporting people to migrate towards more privacy friendly options.
  2. you are missing the point: the reason why Affinity is being designed that once you opt in for the account you must always be logged in, is to avoid abuse, as from what they say. Now, the same "abuse avoidance" can be achieved by means which allow freedom to users and at the same time don't force one to be constantly logged in. What happens if internet drops, for example? Will Affinity compensate me for possible losses? I doubt. And I also doubt that you understand that freedom and privacy rights are not subject to status.
  3. I am sure there is a healthy way of preventing this without abusing your users. And yes, requiring an user to be constantly logged in to have access to own tools is abuse. Once I buy a software or digital goods, I want to be able to have access to that good in my terms, not in seller terms. There is a law in this regards, by the way. Now, in terms of preventing abuse, you can limit connections by preventing an account to connect from multiple locations in a short period of time. Also, upon logging in, the account owner should be requested confirmation in their email. If an account would be shared, having to confirm access by email, would make it impractical for abusive purpose (imagine that you are the person sharing the abusive credentials, would you spend your time to manually grant access to all sorts of requests from random people?). Also, as mentioned above, if the requests would come from all over the world, that would be a clear sign of abuse and the accoint can be permanently banned from using the service. You may be concerned that if user has to email confirm every log in, it will become frustrating. Not if the assets are being installed locally on log in. This means that once logged in, one doesn't necessarily have to log in again until new assets are purchased/added to the inventory and they have to be installed on the specific terminal. You must understand better than anyone that you CANNOT prevent piracy. You may make it less appealing, you can control the level of abuse, but in the end, piracy is part of the game. Moreover, is in your benefit (yeah, surprisingly, piracy is beneficial for commercial software, under certain conditions). Also, I switched from Adobe to Affinity for the ethical stand... I won't support you if you take the control-freak path... please be ethical in your actions.
  4. Great finding, thank you. I understand how this could be useful. So far, when I needed such functionality, I used to lock all other groups that might interact with my work. Bit tedious to go all locking and unlocking.
  5. Question has been asked countless times. Most answers reflecting the best efforts of people to provide an explanation, but hardly the official position or Serif's intended purpose for the two elements (Layers and Groups in Affinity Designer). If there is a clear explanation, I clearly missed it. *I AM AWARE YOU WISH TO HELP, But if your answer is only relying on assumptions, or what you *think* it may be an explanation, please do not reply to this question. The reason for this request is that there is a lot of confusion in this area, so is time for a clear and definitive explanation. Thank you for your understanding. My findings so far: - both layers and groups can hold objects inside. - a group can have layers under, and a layer can also have groups under - when a grouped set of objects is selected and manipulated on the screen, it acts like an object (moves together, scale together). - when an object on a layer is selected on the screen, it is being selected separately from the rest of the objects on the same layer. However, when the layer is being selected in Layers Panel, all elements are being selected and the selection behaves like it was a group. - both layers and groups seem to respond the same to effects and other modifiers (unless I omitted to try certain features which may be specific only to one of the two) Questions: 1. What are the punctual differences between Layers and Groups in AD? 2. When to use Layers and when to use Groups? - of course, the answer to this question will be logically derived from the first one.
  6. Windows 7 x64 AD 1.8.5 - Constraints Panel activated in View/Studio - Constraints Panel nowhere to be seen. Need Help.
  7. I just tried that, indeed it changes the dpi depending on the actual page size (when clicking on it), you are correct. Thank you.
  8. In my own words, if you copy something, copy it to make it better, not a cheaper version. Makes sense? Let me say it again, for you to understand (i'm worried that you often skip the essential): If you come up with your new original, never seen before idea, then you can say "well, is new, is a bit rough, we'll see how it catches and we will adjust it". But when someone else came with an idea and you just copy it, then make sure your copy brings something considerably better, improve it.
  9. This post is not meant to be a criticism, but a suggestion. I would have not spent my time drawing and taking screenshots if I just wanted to rant about something what bothers me. I did observe the interface can be easily improved and I offered my suggestion as designer, exactly because new features tend to have some rough edges. And as a user I'm always happy to provide my feedback. For pct.1: I'm on Windows (still Win7). Tried on all three software. Behavior is similar: the preset DPI will not change when switching between different presets. This is a standard feature, designing for certain applications requires different DPI, so it should come into the help of the user by suggesting the most common dpi value for the need (300 dpi for print, 72 or 96 for various screens, etc). Please check the attached video (was made for AD, but the other two are the same). AD New Doc.webm For pct.2: I understand the reasoning, but "the needs of the many vs the needs of the few"... most templates come with fewer characters, where a bigger font will be just fine. The longer titles, as 'Social media square post' can be written on two lines. No sane UX designer would sacrifice the user experience for a 4 words title. In my view, is way more important that the user has a comfortable experience overall, by easily choosing a page size without having to think too much, compared to the fact that one or two templates may have to suffer in some way. There are always solutions, what matters is the intended result: do we want to make it better for the users, or we stick with some nonsense pattern because we are attached towards it?
  10. I'm really pleased with all the new features and improvements in the new version of Affinity Software. Great work, thank you! One major change I noticed to be the New Document interface, which tries to copy the Adobe style. Getting in trend isn't a bad thing. However, copying for the sake of it I believe it is a very bad thing. In my experience so far, I learned that every feature must have a very clearly defined functional purpose, and not to be there only because it looks cool, or because "other did it too". This being said, the following are a series of suggestions which I believe would help improving the New Document interface for all your products. I hope they will be considered and if deemed worthy, implemented (an image is worth 1000 words, so I made an image for you):
  11. Hi, I'm getting confused about how and when to use groups vs layers in AD. The question has been already discussed (previous discussion about groups and layers) but the answer seems to be unsatisfactory as it's full of personal opinions and the only video that seems to answer the question is not available anymore. So, if there is any solid, official answer to the question: what is the difference between LAYERS and GROUPS in Affinity Designer?, please post it here, so people like me, looking for it, will find it in the future. Thank you.
  12. Thanks! I wasn't aware of this hidden feature and funny thing, never thought to try :)). Much appreciated!
  13. Hi, not sure what is your workflow, but until AF Designer has Trace Bitmap implemented, you still can benefit of this feature for free: Inkscape is free, open source vector drawing software with a rather decent and powerful Bitmap Tracing functionality.
  14. One of the most needed features in resizing the canvas is percentage! We have percentage in Guides Manager, but we don't have it when resizing things. How much is 50% from 3255? Yeah, I need a moment to figure it out too... but if we would have an option to choose percent along with mm, pixels, points and other units, that task would be performed by the computer (this is why we invented computers, i believe). So, if there isn't too much trouble and the Affinity Development team is listening, it would be awesome if the next release has this feature. Best wishes!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.