fiëé

The short answer, no
The longer answer, kinda
The installer will run once you have .Net 4/4.5/4.7 installed in your Wine Prefix (used staging 3.13) and completes without any problems. Its starting it up that gets rough.
The windows version of Affinity photo requires the Windows DWM for composition of the application screen and has some custom DLLs that dont seem to happy to hook into the WINE implementation of Windows. The DLLs just straight fail to load at all and while you can get it to attempt to run switching WINE to Windows 8/10 bypassing the Aero not enabled, the application crashes just after opening.
 
I haven't done extensive testing to get it to actually open, but truth be told you likely won't see good results even if you do. It'll likely run very unstable and slow which defeats it's entire purpose. I imagine because WINE doesn't have a complete DX11 implementation, doesn't have Windows DWM, and doesn't have/implement in full/doesn't implement the exact same any number of other necessary Windows parts it's just not going to be enjoyable. I don't know exactly how ingrained in the Windows ecosystem (dlls, etc)  the windows version of Affinity Photo is but my guess is more than WINE can deal with at this time. 
 
Hope this helps anyone on Linux looking for an answer and saves you from wasting your time trying to get an application going in WINE just to have it run awful.
EDIT: some issue could be a combo of it requiring .NET Framework and a 64bit install/Prefix. Wine can be a bit sketchy with .NET in 64bit prefixes and not all functions work running .NET application. Issues could also be arising from the rendering engine not enjoying running in WINE . Ive tried everything i ccan to narrow down exactly what issues are causing the DLLs in the program folder to not load and i have to just chalk it up to "AP needs fully implemented windows"

The Unicode standard says:
Since the left-pointing guillemets/chevrons are “usually” opening, I can live with them called “left” even in German.
But I’d also like to be able to define my own sets of quotation marks.

BTW “guillemots” are sea birds, not quotation marks, even if Adobe used that word in their “standard”.
 
Another related issue: In InDesign I could replace " by " and get typographical quotation marks according to the current settings. I used that feature very often to normalize the articles in my projects.

Thank you, I thought there was a good Mac installer around, but didn’t remember where. As a known name in the TeX community I’m sure we can trust Richard Koch. (I still prefer the command line way, since I use a lot of “ports” anyway and can update all of them automatically.)

In LaTeX they are, but with the coffins package you can get creative.
In ConTeXt tables are mostly fun, see “natural tables”.
OT, EOT

No, please don’t implement footnotes etc. – it would ruin my advantage as a TeX user. 

(This subforum is not really the right place for this, but I’d like to have it found where people might look for it.)

As most of you are aware, the Affinity apps can’t handle included fonts in PDFs, they always try to parse the PDF and do a good job about that, except they can’t use the embedded fonts but try to replace them with fonts installed/active on your system. Often you don’t have these fonts and must not replace them, e.g. if you get ads from a customer. There’s no possibility (yet) to “just place” a PDF as an image.
You could rasterize the PDF into a high resolution bitmap – but not with one of the Affinity apps, and if you wanted to use Photoshop, you wouldn’t use Affinity...
The best solution is to convert the text in curves. You can do that with Acrobat Pro, but I am here to avoid “Clay” apps. It’s easy with GhostScript on the command line:
gs -dNoOutputFonts -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -o Myfile_nofonts.pdf Myfile.pdf Or to convert all files in a folder:
for PDF in *.pdf; do gs -dNoOutputFonts -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -o "${PDF/.pdf/_nofonts.pdf}" "$PDF"; done You must first change into that folder, of course. And have GhostScript installed; you can get it via HomeBrew or MacPorts (there are also binary packages around I guess).
(EDIT: The quotes around $PDF are necessary if your file names contain spaces.)

You can’t avoid getting your hands dirty on the command line (Terminal.app). You can read on the websites of HomeBrew and MacPorts how to install them. Which one you use is a matter of taste, please don’t anyone start a flame war! I’m used to MacPorts; HomeBrew users please help with that.
You need Apple’s development environment Xcode, you can install it via AppStore (or make a free account on developer.apple.com and download it there, as MacPorts suggests). You’ll never start that app yourself, but it contains the necessary compilers etc. that let Ports or Brew build programs from sources.
Xcode is a huge download, after it’s completed you can install the necessary command line programs and confirm the license. Open Terminal.app and type/copy these lines into its window (don’t forget to hit Return after each line):
xcode-select --install xcodebuild -license Then you download the pkg/dmg for your macOS version from https://www.macports.org/install.php and install it.
This installs the basics for using MacPorts, but no programs that you can use. First update the list of ports (packages), again in Terminal:
sudo port -v selfupdate (You should run that every month or so if you want to stay up to date.)
“sudo” means “superuser do“, i.e. “execute as administrator”, you need to enter your account password to proceed.
(And it means the whole thing won’t work if you don’t have an admin account, e.g. in a company, then whine at your admin until they yield and install that stuff for you.)
If that worked, you’re set to finally install what you wanted:
sudo ports install ghostscript This will download the sources, compile them and install ghostscript in /opt/local/bin/. To check that, call
which gs That should answer with “/opt/local/bin/gs”. If it doesn’t, close your Terminal window, open a new one and try again. Still doesn’t work? Then you can call gs with the full path (i.e. “/opt/local/bin/gs”) or add the path to your PATH variable (that determines where bash, that’s the “shell” running in Terminal, looks for commands/programs):
echo "export PATH=/opt/local/bin:$PATH" >> ~/.bash_profile A lot of hassle for a single program, but MacPorts as well as HomeBrew offer a lot of tools and fun stuff, mostly ported from Linux or *BSD, that you might like. That’s a tad off topic here...
It’s probably easier to enter “ghostscript macos download” into your favourite search engine and choose one of the sites that offer free downloads. I don’t know which you can or should trust.

Huge problem. Makes working in Affinity frustrating much of the time.

I am really liking publisher so far, and can imagine working with it professionally in the future.
I am using indesign cs5.5 at the moment and one thing I would like to see in publisher which is in this program is collapsible panels.
I like to have some panels open all the time, like character, paragraph, pages and color. This already fills my workspace pretty much, but I would like other options quickly available too, but not take up space all the time, f.i. the text frame option, the text styles and stroke options.
Having some way to group a couple and minimize them would be very helpful.

My feeling so far is that the Section Manager is rather limited in utility at the moment. It can be used for managing changes of pagination and for use with inserting a field. I can't think of another reason. But at least with the feature in place now, it has room to grow in the future, such being able to drag and drop, which is a very useful suggestion. I would also like to see some kind of visual grouping in the Pages studio of the sections.
The idea of the book feature from several documents has been brought up before, but I do not remember seeing any confirmation from developers that they are considering the idea or hope to implement it at a later time. Or maybe I have forgotten some statement; I am so forgetful.
In my work, I would use the book feature only rarely, but would be very glad for it on those times when I do need it.

Hi there, I've switched over from indesign and immediately missing one function. 
The way I used to create a book is, creating every chapter as a document and putting them later together in a book file. 
In this way it is much clearer and it is also easier to change the order of the individual chapters.
Is there a similar feature in Publisher or what approach would you suggest? 
Thank you for your time. 
Best, Manege

The only thing I can suggest is to manually step through the images in the Resource Manager and (again manually) copy and paste the file path name from the bottom left of that panel. Hopefully there will be a way of doing this with the Fields Studio. Damn good idea to add it in as a Field > Caption. We could add that to each image if we wanted. I shall think more on this.

JavaScript (more correctly called ECMAScript) is something I'm kind of learning out of necessity right now for a project I am working on which will run in a web browser.
It is unfortunate that yet another horrible language has become so entrenched in supposedly-modern applications that are designed to run in a web browser that it will be difficult if not impossible to get any kind of agreement on replacing it with something more legitimate.
One of the issues is that in spite of attempts over the years to "modernize" the language, it still has too strong a need to maintain compatibility with legacy code that was written in earlier, more primitive versions of the language that did things differently, so you wind up with some features using one approach to doing something, and others using a completely different approach to do almost exactly the same thing, but neither approach works in both places.  It is a language that has been haphazardly layered on top of itself by competing groups trying to pull it in different directions and the result is just a mess.
Couple that with the prevalent "C"-like syntax and it is not even remotely a fun language to work with, though admittedly there are a few interesting aspects to its design that are at least partially redeeming compared to other languages in the general "C-like" language family.  First-class functions and closures are a definite plus, and prototype-based inheritance makes it interesting from a theoretical standpoint anyway.
Never would I recommend further propagating it however.  We are kind of stuck with it for code that runs in a web browser, and I for one would prefer that it stay locked up in that cage until such time as we can replace it with something better there too.
 
For the record, I'm not the biggest fan of AppleScript as a language either, but it, like JavaScript, is the only real option in its domain right now for some use cases.

+1 for python. See the magic that happens with drawbot or nodebox

Or just good old Python like every other piece of software in the world that isn't InDesign, lol.

I've run into a Publisher crash yesterday that somehow involved Apple's JavaScriptCore library – I do wonder if that's an indication of something coming up 
That being said, I'm still hoping for Python instead of or at least in addition to JavaScript. Having written extensions for different software with both languages, I found that writing extensions in Python was always quick, easy, efficient and even fun, and there are tons of great third party libraries available, whereas any kind of JavaScript extensions, particularly for Adobe programs, have consistently been a royal pain. Getting good integration into the user interface of the host applications (like adding custom menu commands or panels) has never been very robust with any JavaScript-based extensions in any application I have come in contact with. And it's so easy to learn the basics of Python that I believe anyone with JavaScript experience would be able to get started in no time.
I realize that's a rather controversial point and everybody has their own personal preference, but I do encourage everyone to have a look at a few basic Python tutorials and form their own opinion.

Bleed is not showing on the Artboard.
The bleed is there, you can snap object to it but it's not showing. It doesn't help to show/hide bleed or Clip to Canvas on/off. Is there any other option how to display it on the screen...

I think you can’t expect those very old 8 bit PostScript fonts to work with a modern application – even if it would be nice.

As far as I know the different font technologies from TeX, you need a mapping of Type 1 encoding vectors to Unicode – OTF and not-too-old TTF fonts have their characters defined according to Unicode, but in PostScript the encoding depends on local settings to match those of the font. While some programs can handle those old fonts, especially if they stem from the 8 bit era themselves, I can’t blame modern programs to avoid that hassle of supporting outdated technology.

Hi both,
We are aware of this and it has already been logged with our developers. 

See several other threads on the same subject: AD can’t handle embedded fonts in PDFs, it tries to replace them with active fonts.

That’s against the intention of PDF and a severe shortcoming, but known.