Sorry to keep banging on about this - which I have been doing ever since the first beta, see many posts - but I was so disappointed these two were not in latest update. Perhaps if I give you a hard example of what I have to do on a regular basis in my job producing magazines, the people at Affinity - who I have the utmost respect for - will see why it is impossible for me to give up InDesign for Publisher.
To take just one community magazine I produce, typically 48pp A5.
Tables: Every month there will be service timetables for 3 churches. There is also a calendar of local events (a bit thin at the moment! But normally running to 3 pages). The information is supplied as tables. The tables import easily into InDesign and of course will flow from one page to another. Impossible in AF Publisher. Even if I could spare the time to break the table into two and paste the second half into a different frame if (when!) the editor requests extra rows, I would have to do it all over again.
Columns: About half the articles are in two columns. They look like this: A centred heading spanning both columns followed by some text in two columns for that section; a sub heading for the next section centred across both columns followed by some text in two columns for that section; and so on. Very easy in InDesign using the Span All command. Impossible, in any practical sense, in AF Publisher.
I would love to ditch InDesign, but alas, AF Publisher is not up to it yet. If only the designers had asked real world publishers like me right from the beginning what was essential.
There seems to be two similar threads to this and I have contributed on this topic to both. Reading my original post here perhaps it came over as unnecessarily harsh snd censorious, so let me post on this forum the piece I wrote elsewhere this morning, which I hope gives a rounder picture of my feelings. (I was responding to a poster who suggested I was being unfair and I should be privileged to have the chance to test out the beta.) I wrote:
Hawk: The absence of inline graphics and tables makes InDesign unfit as a professional tool. So would not having the other features you mention of course. But you are creating a false dichotomy - it is not a case of choosing between essential features. If it really would take another 2 - 5 years to create a professional DTP app (where did you get that figure from?) then either they should hire an extra software engineer or throw in the towel.
The important point that I and others have made is that Affinity did not ask us professionals what was essential in a DTP app. They cite their 25 year experience in DTP (with the dreadful Serif!) but ignore the collective experience of many real world users such a myself who have been using DTP to make a living since its dawn.
Nobody expects the first iteration of new software to be perfect. (When InDesign first came out it did not have tables.) And I know I speak for others when I say we have nothing but goodwill towards the Affinity team's efforts, and that we do not wish to nit-pick. But there are certain elements that have to be in place if an app is to be seen as a viable replacement for an existing go-to app. Without inline graphics and tables (something a developer colleague assures me is quite easy to implement - even the humble Notes on the Mac has it) APublisher just becomes another village fete poster app. [Having read the above post regarding the holy grail ability to open APublisher in ADesigner and APhoto I would suggest that for longer documents (which is what we are talking about here) it is an ambition that could be implemented in full detail later.]
Our motives for these posts is not to have a pop at Affinity, but to help them in their endeavours, which we applaud. We understand that this is a beta and that 1.0 will look different, but we are dismayed that a moderator has said this is not on the immediate feature list.
As for having the beta to play with being a privilege, I think the boot is on the other foot - Affinity should feel privileged that there are seasoned designers out there freely giving their time to make the app viable.
I suspect that privately there are red faces over this, and (assuming they read these posts!) hope that wiser counsels prevail and that this issue is given the priority it deserves.
As someone has noted elsewhere, a road map of future features would be very useful. If inline graphics is on the list, at the top, then great; if it is not there at all then at least we know not to bother looking at APublisher as a viable ID alternative. My experience of 55 years of business is that openness always pays off in the long run, and I know you guys are committed and working hard to that end. PS: I use ADesigner all the time, you did a great job. Illustrator was always impenetrable to most people who just wanted to get a job done and you nailed it. But knocking ID off its perch I think is bit harder. But I am sure you will get there - if you listen!
Absolutely we are listening. I did not mean to imply we were not. Reading it back it certainly was not my finest post (made on launch day under an avalanche of posts but hey). I meant to say that we agree that there are some obvious things missing but that many of the suggestions are already on our internal roadmap because of our long time in the industry, and input here will help inform the plans and discussions. I was also being honest about our development cycle saying that we cannot do some things (like footnotes or inline graphics and inline tables for example) until other architectural changes are done which have to be planned in carefully because although Publisher is not yet released, all files in the Affinity range are openable by all other applications so file formats have to be carefully considered when new feature are added.
Sorry if it appeared like I was saying we were not interested, I could go back and rephrase it but I hope this post goes some way towards a better explanation. My QA & Tech Support team are particularly interested in the bugs but I am sure the management and developers will be looking closely at these suggestions forums going forward.
There is also an option in Edit > Preferences > General to "Insert filler text as text".
Then you won't need to expand it after inserting if you do it frequently.
