captain_slocum

This thread has developed into an interesting philosophical discussion about the way a company is run, about tokenism ("Your custom is important to us") and about the way, as companies grow larger, they often become self-serving rather than customer led. Patrick, I am sure your heart is in the right place, and I have no personal beef with you I assure you, but your reply is very telling. In my posts I have given you every opportunity to say something like "thank you for your considered feedback, your remarks will be passed to our development team for consideration" but presumably that is not how it works with Serif. This is how the whole thread started, with bemused Affinity users wondering, why the secrecy, why no roadmap, why no apparent acknowledgement of our suggestions. It just seems a pity to me that you (the company) appear to be wasting an enormous asset - a group of real-world users who care about your products.

No doubt you replied to someone/something in the threads, but show me in one of my threads where you explicitly acknowledge to me that you are aware that flowing tables, text to table/table to text and spanning columns are an issue and that you are/are not considering them or that they are/are not important to you, and I will happily apologise. It's quite possible I have missed something. I don't know why you are so defensive. I am trying to help you here, not slag you off. Look closely at my posts and you will see I give you considerable praise where it is merited. So now this is your chance to set my mind at rest. Could you state categorically a) that you are considering the above features, and if so when might that be, or b) you are not considering them because... for what ever reason. That way I will get off your back (as you see it) stop being helpful (as I intend it to be).

So that explains a lot! FYI, I was not ranting about "one of my" suggestions, but pointing out how a golden opportunity to make Publisher a world beater has been missed. There a dozens of things I would like to see different in every bit of software I use - but I don't mention them because it is not about me. Apologies - I should have made it clear I was referring to the issues that I was talking about in this thread. Well I'm used to being patronised because I'm old, but really? You don't think I haven't tried? There is a work around of sorts to get flowing tables which is to put the table into Word, turn it into text using tab separated, copy it and paste into an AP text box. This preserves the tabs and the layout, but if you want to alter the tabbing in AP, you have to do it one line at a time. And of course you cannot show cell outlines.

I think this thread about communication is an important one. I don't get the feeling that Serif moderators really read the the posts in a meaningful way to sort the wheat from the chaff and reply to the posts that address really important concerns. I have been posting for years and never once have I had a reply from a moderator addressing my concerns. I must make a very clear distinction here between things that it would be nice to have (trace in Designer eg) but are easily realised by third party apps and trivial issues (UI concerns, colours of icons, etc) that an be lived with, and things that make Publisher unusable for professionals (no flowing tables, no text to table/table to text, no column span). There has been much sneering in some posts about using the word "professional". Let me explain. I'm a professional but that doesn't mean I'm better than you. It means I derive all or some of my income from using DTP software. So let me give you a real life example of why I can't use Publisher yet and have to keep subscribing to Adobe InDesign. Last week a client sent me a 16 page catalogue to design. The items in the catalogue with their specs and prices, were in a Word table. In InDesign I imported the table and it flows across the pages, simple. If (when!) the client sends me an extra line to add near the front of the table, everything will flow through and adjust. I also publish a monthly magazine with a calendar, usually spanning 3 or 4 pages, sent in a table format – same issues. These are is just not possible to do in Publisher in a way that makes economic sense. This is not some arcane or idiosyncratic feature that only a few people want. This is essential. Yet over the years I have never had any one from Serif acknowledge this and reply with a "we're never going to do this" or a "It's on our roadmap coming soon", and I am certain they won't now. Why do I bother? Because I'm old school, I was in at the beginning of WP and DTP and later the internet and still believe in helping worthwhile projects. I have said many times that there is much that is excellent about the Affinity Suite (I use Designer and Photo all the time), hats off to Serif. Which is why it is all the more frustrating that there is this blind spot with Publisher - it's like watching a loved son or daughter making some poor decisions in life and feeling powerless to help.

Hi David, This is getting pretty off topic so I have private messaged you.

David, you have put this very succinctly and explained perfectly why this is such an important feature. If you now apply the same argument to flowing tables and table to text/text to table – which is the way information is often presented in many documents, especially technical reports, something I do a lot of – you can see why APub would be advised to take our comments onboard. Just last week I had to produce a document which had information in table format flowing over 6 pages. The editor sent me an amendment which added 6 rows near the front of the table. I was using InDesign so it was a trivial job. In APub I would have had to redo all 6 pages from scratch. Another example – a magazine I produce has a calendar sent to me as a table which spans the centrefold. It is often the case that items are added at the last moment. David, forgive me if you feel I am hijacking your thread, but to me the two issues of column span and flowing tables are linked, indeed, I have been requesting both these features regularly on this forum for years, which is why it is so disappointing that they have missed the boat with ver 2 for these essential features. I understand perfectly the argument expressed here by others that many people have features they would like to see but are trivial or have easy workarounds, or are pleading special cases, but these two things are not in this category, they are DTP staples, for which there is no sensible alternative. Being old school, I care about good software at a reasonable but sustainable price, which is why I spend time on this forum and have paid for the v2 suite (they need revenue to continue) and daily use Designer and Photo. From a selfish point of view, if span columns and flowing text (and maybe GREP and find & replace customisable presets) were added to APub, I could finally ditch my need for the Adobe suite! (a hundred smiley emojis!)

To answer the points one by one: 1. Professionally means earning the larger part of your income from DTP. 2. You may be right, but it doesn't feel like it. 3. (ignoring the insulting quote marks) we are not talking here about whether we like the colours of an icon or a hundred and one things that don't matter/have easy work arounds. We are talking absolute deal breakers that anybody who uses DTP extensively for technical reports, books, magazines, company prospectuses, exam papers, etc etc etc cannot do without. 4. I don't use it, because I can't yet, but I do support it because I believe in it as a worthwhile project that I want to see succeed (yes, I know that's old school, but then I'm very old). 5. No there are not - not for macOS anyway. Or does the ellipse signify sarcasm? In which case the implication is that there are not any other such options, in which case it is more important than ever to make sure APub is fit for purpose.

I and many others have been asking for span columns for years. (Also flowing tables). But it seems Publisher is very much the poor relation. What span columns means is that with a two or three or whatever column article, you select a word, sentence, whatever, and by clicking an icon, span it across all or some of the columns. The spanned columns then flow with the text when it is altered. InDesign have had it since forever and I would say I use it 20 - 40 times a month. There is no work around in APub that makes efficient sense. By not including flowing tables, text to table/table to text, span columns and find and replace user presets, Serif are basically saying, this is a jolly good flyer production app. Which it is. But it's no good for serious DTP yet. I am not someone finding fault for no reason on a whim. All of the above would cost me literally many hours a month if I used APub instead of InDesign. I love Designer and Photo is damn good, but Publisher has a long way to go. And will never get there unless it listens to professionals who know what they are talking about. It frustrates me that no one from Serif has ever acknowledged my contributions that I have been making for years, not even to say sorry that's too hard to do. As well as making a living out of IT, I have been a lecturer in many aspects of IT and computer design and I have learned so much over the years from listening to my students. Why oh why will Serif not just admit that maybe someone else might know what a good DTP app looks like?

postmaddesign - are you even reading my posts? How is pointing out (time and time again) what Publisher needs to make it world beating, "negativity"? In what way is that not constructive? Or are you suggesting we just offer praise what ever they do? I suggest you read my last post and the one before and then tell me I am being negative. There are so many things that Publisher is missing but most of them are trivial or have quick work arounds and I do not point them out. But as grapher has pointed out, the tables problem and the lack of column span makes it unusable for most print designers, in many situations. I wish it wasn't so. I have tried in this forum ever since Publisher came out to point this out but am ignored. I'll keep on trying to offer this constructive criticism, but I will NOT offer bland congratulations to something that, by listening to real-world users, could be made world class very easily.

Grapher has it spot on. I bought the V2 to support Serif in their work, but tables and columns support is vital to me too (and a great many people), which is why I have to use InDesign still for much of my work. It is not a case of someone with a special requirement being negative, it is about someone who is old school and cares about good software at a decent price, being a critical friend. The things that are missing are vital components of a modern DTP product. I have been in the IT business since 1980 (yes - we did have computers then. In fact I programmed my first computer when I was at school in 1962!). It just seems such a shame that something that could be the best is falling at the last hurdle. I wish Serif all the good will in the world - if I didn't, do you think I would be wasting my time writing this?

I fully appreciate the need for Serif to raise revenue - they can't go on doing updates for ever for no more revenue. But while there are some interesting things in Designer and Photo, which I have happily paid for, the upgrade to 2 for Publisher is disappointingly poor. I don't know how the Publisher team go about setting up focus groups to find out what people want, but I don't feel they can be going about it in the right way. As a professional designer, I spend a lot of time finding out exactly what my customers want, but I'm not sure Serif have done this. Even just hiring someone on to their staff who was a seasoned print designer with a wide range of experience would have made a huge difference, but I can't imagine this is something they have done. I'm echoing the post from Bryn Reiger here, though less optimistic than him that they will listen this time - they haven't done so yet! Perhaps their system of toting up the number of requests for each feature is at fault. If ten friends told me I had a cold and one doctor told me it was a serious disease, I think I would go with the doctor. Quality, not quantity. But I am wondering - is it me? When the Affinity suite came along, I thought - aha, this is going to give Adobe a run for their money! But perhaps I have been deluded by my own expectations. Maybe all they wanted for Publisher was to make it a decent flyer/small booklet app - which it is. In fact the only one really, for the Mac anyway, as Word and Pages are just WP and InDesign too complicated and expensive for the average village hall or small company publicist. Well it is what it is, and I'm not sure I can carry on carrying a torch for the Publisher part of the Affinity suite much longer, though I will continue to recommend Photo and Designer.

I agree with rparmar, Publisher seems to be the poor relation. I use Designer in preference to Illustrator, although I have the Adobe suite, because it has nearly all the functions (apart from trace) but is easier to use. Photo ditto, though I find myself still using PS for some things out of laziness because I have been using it for decades - but I'm sure I could do without it. So I am overall happy with Affinity suite 2.0, though not overwhelmed, but I know three people apart from myself that would ditch InDesign if Publisher were better.

Like others I am underwhelmed by this 2.0 release. Lack of column span and still no table to text or text to table and no flowing tables are enough to keep me with InDesign. I have been a DTP professional for 35 years, I know what is needed and what is not. One monthly mag I produce would take me a lot longer without those features (and lead to errors). As a flyer app it is very capable and I have supported it, and offered my professional advice for some time, but I just get ignored. It is a great pity. If they had listened to the professionals who use this to make a living, they would by now have an InDesign replacement.

After banging on about tables for years in this forum, I had hoped that Publisher version 2 would have addressed the glaring issues. Alas no text to table, no table to text, no flowing tables. And no span columns. These are essential tools. It's hard to see what is that different. I am beyond disappointed. This is a dot update, not a version upgrade. I said recently I would wait for a major upgrade before passing further judgement, and have wanted to support Affinity by giving them the benefit of my 35 years experience in DTP. Sorry folks, this is not yet a serious publishing tool, it is still just a flyer app. Hey Ho, can't ditch Adobe yet I'm afraid.

Having produced a monthly local magazine for 7 years and having used Affinity Publisher for the last 2 years to produce it (previously I used In Design), I am handing over to someone who uses QuarkXpress. Does anyone know if there is a good way I can export my files to help my successor, or of some conversion software. In spite of being the first DTP I ever used back in the late 80's untiI I swopped to InDesign about 20 years ago, I'm afraid I know nothing about the modern QuarXpress, so any help would be welcome.